10-K 1 form10-k.htm

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

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

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2020

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

For the transition period from to

Commission File Number: 001-36445

NanoVibronix, Inc.

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

Delaware

01-0801232

(State or other jurisdiction of

incorporation or organization)

(I.R.S. Employer

Identification Number)

525 Executive Blvd. Elmsford, New York		10523
(Address of principal executive office)		(Zip Code)

Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: (914) 233-3004

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

Title of each class		Trading Symbol		Name of each exchange on which registered
Common stock, par value $0.001 per share		NOAV		NASDAQ Capital Market

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 in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes [ ] No [X]

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

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 [X] 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 (§ 232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit such files). Yes [X] No [ ]

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, a 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.

Large accelerated filer	[ ]	Accelerated filer	[ ]
Non-accelerated filer	[X]	Smaller reporting company	[X]
		Emerging growth company	[ ]

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 13(a) of the Exchange 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 control 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 [X]

The aggregate market value of our common stock held by non-affiliates as of June 30, 2020, was approximately $9,447,579.

The number of shares outstanding of the registrant’s Common Stock as of March 23, 2021 was 24,109,635 shares.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

The information required by Part III of this Form 10-K, to the extent not set forth herein, is incorporated by reference from the registrant’s definitive proxy statement for its 2021 Annual Meeting of Stockholders. Such proxy statement shall be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission within 120 days after the end of the fiscal year to which this report relates.

PART I

ITEM 1. BUSINESS

Cautionary Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements; Risk Factor Summary

This Annual Report on Form 10-K contains “forward-looking statements,” which include information relating to future events, future financial performance, financial projections, strategies, expectations, competitive environment and regulation. Words such as “may,” “should,” “could,” “would,” “predicts,” “potential,” “continue,” “expects,” “anticipates,” “future,” “intends,” “plans,” “believes,” “estimates,” and similar expressions, as well as statements in future tense, identify forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements should not be read as a guarantee of future performance or results and may not be accurate indications of when such performance or results will be achieved. Forward-looking statements are based on information we have when those statements are made or management’s good faith belief as of that time with respect to future events, and are subject to a number of risks, and uncertainties and assumptions that could cause actual performance or results to differ materially from those expressed in or suggested by the forward-looking statements. These risk are more fully described in the “Risk Factors” section of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. The following is a summary of such risks:

	●	Our history of losses and expectation of continued losses.
	●	The risk that we may not obtain the requisite votes at our special meeting to ratify an increase in the number of authorized shares of common stock and the related issuance of such shares.
	●	The geographic, social and economic impact of COVID-19 on the Company’s business operations.
	●	Our ability to raise funding for, and the timing of, clinical studies and eventual U.S. Food and Drug Administration approval of our product candidates.
	●	Regulatory actions that could adversely affect the price of or demand for our approved products.
	●	Market acceptance of existing and new products.
	●	Favorable or unfavorable decisions about our products from government regulators, insurance companies or other third-party payers.
	●	Risks of product liability claims and the availability of insurance.
	●	Our ability to successfully develop and commercialize our products.
	●	Our ability to generate internal growth.
	●	Risks related to computer system failures and cyber-attacks.
	●	Our ability to obtain regulatory approval in foreign jurisdictions.
	●	Uncertainty regarding the success of our clinical trials for our products in development.
	●	Risks related to our operations in Israel, including political, economic and military instability.
	●	The price of our securities is volatile with limited trading volume
	●	Our ability to comply with the continued listing requirements of the NASDAQ capital market.
	●	Our ability to maintain effective internal control over financial reporting and to remedy identified material weaknesses.
	●	We are a “smaller reporting company” and have reduced disclosure obligations that may make our stock less attractive to investors.
	●	Our intellectual property portfolio and our ability to protect our intellectual property rights.
	●	Our ability to recruit and retain qualified regulatory and research and development personnel.
	●	Unforeseen changes in healthcare reimbursement for any of our approved products.
	●	The adoption of health policy changes and health care reform.
	●	Lack of financial resources to adequately support our operations.
	●	Difficulties in maintaining commercial scale manufacturing capacity and capability.
	●	Our ability to generate internal growth.
	●	Changes in our relationship with key collaborators.
	●	Changes in the market valuation or earnings of our competitors or companies viewed as similar to us.
	●	Our failure to comply with regulatory guidelines.
	●	Uncertainty in industry demand and patient wellness behavior.
	●	General economic conditions and market conditions in the medical device industry.
	●	Risks related to our operations in Israel.
	●	Future sales of large blocks of our common stock, which may adversely impact our stock price.
	●	Depth of the trading market in our common stock.

The foregoing does not represent an exhaustive list of matters that may be covered by the forward-looking statements contained herein or risk factors that we are faced with that may cause our actual results to differ from those anticipated in our forward-looking statements. Please see “Item 1A. Risk Factors” for additional risks which could adversely impact our business and financial performance. Moreover, new risks regularly emerge, and it is not possible for us to predict or articulate all risks we face, nor can we assess the impact of all risks on our business or the extent to which any risk, or combination of risks, may cause actual results to differ from those contained in any forward-looking statements. All forward-looking statements included in this Form 10-K are based on information available to us on the date hereof. Except to the extent required by applicable laws or rules, we undertake no obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statement, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise.

Unless the context otherwise indicates or requires, the terms “we,” “our,” “us,” “NanoVibronix,” and the “Company,” as used in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, refer to NanoVibronix, Inc. and its subsidiaries as a combined entity, except where otherwise stated or where it is clear that the terms mean only NanoVibronix, Inc. exclusive of its subsidiaries.

Overview

We were organized as a Delaware corporation in October 2003. Through our wholly-owned subsidiary, NanoVibronix Ltd., a private company incorporated under the laws of the State of Israel, we focus on noninvasive biological response-activating devices that target biofilm prevention, pain therapy , and wound healing and can be administered at home, without the assistance of medical professionals. Our primary products, which are in various stages of clinical and market development, currently consist of:

	●	UroShield™, an ultrasound-based product that is designed to prevent bacterial colonization and biofilm in urinary catheters, increase antibiotic efficacy and decrease pain and discomfort associated with urinary catheter use;

	●	PainShield™, a patch-based therapeutic ultrasound technology to treat pain, muscle spasm and joint contractures by delivering a localized ultrasound effect to treat pain and induce soft tissue healing in a targeted area; and

	●	WoundShield™, a patch-based therapeutic ultrasound device intended to facilitate tissue regeneration and wound healing by using ultrasound to increase local capillary perfusion and tissue oxygenation.

Each of our UroShield, PainShield, and WoundShield products employs a small, disposable transducer that transmits low frequency, low intensity ultrasound acoustic waves that seek to repair and regenerate tissue, musculoskeletal and vascular structures, and decrease biofilm formation on urinary catheters and associated urinary tract infections. Through their size, effectiveness and ease of use, these products are intended to eliminate the need for technicians and medical personnel to manually administer ultrasound treatment through large transducers, thereby promoting patient independence and enabling more cost-effective home-based care.

PainShield is currently cleared for marketing in the United States by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. In September 2020, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration exercised its Enforcement Discretion to allow distribution of the UroShield device in the U.S. during the COVID-19 pandemic. While the permitted use is currently temporary, it does permit the import of the UroShield to the U.S. during the COVID-19 pandemic. All three of our products have CE Mark approval in the European Union, and a certificate allowing us to sell PainShield, UroShield and WoundShield in Israel. We are able to sell PainShield, UroShield and WoundShield in India and Ecuador based on our CE Mark. We have consummated sales of PainShield and UroShield in the relevant markets, although to date sales have been minimal; WoundShield has not generated significant revenue to date. Outside of the United States we generally apply, through our distributor, for approval in a particular country for a particular product only when we have a distributor in place with respect to such product.

In the United States, PainShield and UroShield requires a prescription from a licensed healthcare practitioner. If U.S. Food and Drug Administration clearance is obtained, we anticipate that WoundShield will require a prescription from a licensed healthcare practitioner in the United States. UroShield has been approved through the U.S. Food and Drug Administration under Enforcement Discretion for the duration of the Covid-19 health emergency and is intended to be sold directly to health care facilities and therefore will not require a prescription for these venues. However, in other countries in which we sell PainShield, UroShield, and WoundShield, such products are eligible for sale without a prescription.

In addition to the need to obtain regulatory approvals, we anticipate that sales volumes and prices of our UroShield, PainShield, and WoundShield products will depend in large part on the availability of insurance coverage and reimbursement from third party payers. Third party payers include governmental programs such as Medicare and Medicaid in the United States, private insurance plans and workers’ compensation plans. We do not currently have reimbursement codes for use of WoundShield in any of the markets in which we have regulatory authority to sell WoundShield. Of the markets in which we have regulatory authority to sell PainShield, prior to January 2020, we only had reimbursement codes in the United States (i.e., CPT codes) for clinical use only. Effective as of January 2020, the U.S. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) approved our PainShield™ for reimbursement for Medicare beneficiaries on a national basis. We were notified on March 30, 2020 that our Medicare Enrollment Application was approved, and we are now an approved Medicare Supplier for Durable Medical Equipment, or DME, through the National Supplier Clearinghouse, Palmetto-GBA as well as Noridian Administrative Services, LLC, the two Medicare Administrative Contractors that handle DME reimbursement nationwide. PainShield is currently available for Medicare reimbursement on a national level under new HCPCS (Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System) code K1004. With respect to UroShield, which may be used in a clinical and home setting, we do not currently have reimbursement codes in any of the markets in which we have regulatory authority to sell UroShield. We are seeking reimbursement codes for use of our products in the markets in which we have regulatory authority, including the United States, to sell such products. Our current ongoing research and planned research may facilitate our ability to obtain reimbursement codes and there is no guarantee that we will be successful in obtaining such codes quickly, or at all. We have engaged two reimbursement experts, Redemption Revenue Cycle Solutions, LLC, and McGuire Woods, to help facilitate insurance reimbursement.

We have completed six separate clinical studies with UroShield that together evaluated approximately 194 patients with urinary catheters. In patients where the UroShield product was used there were no serious adverse events reported, while a variety of clinical beneficial observations were seen including: catheter biofilm reduction, reduction in catheter associated pain, reduction in urinary tract infections, and a significant decrease in bacteriuria rates. We completed a double blind clinical trial for UroShield in the United States in October 2018. The results of the study, entitled “The Effect of Surface Acoustic Waves on Bacterial Load and Preventing Catheter-Associated Urinary Tract Infections (CAUTI) in Long Term Indwelling Catheters,” were published in the December 2018 issue of Medical & Surgical Urology, a peer-reviewed journal in the field of urology. In the study, 55 patients in a skilled nursing facility chain treated with long term indwelling catheters were evaluated. There was a significant difference between the treated group and the placebo group in the number of colony forming units (“CFU”) present upon evaluation, as well as on the number of treated urinary tract infections (“UTI”), and the effect lasted beyond the time of active treatment. The study concluded that the UroShield™ device was shown to be effective in significantly reducing the number of CFUs in patients with indwelling catheters. The study also concluded that the UroShield™ device was shown to be effective in reducing the number of treated UTIs in this patient population, and surface acoustic waves in the form of the UroShield™ device is an effective tool in the prevention of catheter-associated UTI and while further evaluation is encouraged, can be safely utilized with a high likelihood of success. In July 2017, we engaged Idonea Solutions, Inc., an FDA consultant, to assist in our efforts to obtain clearance under the FDA’s Enforcement Discretion, and obtain 510(K) clearance which is still ongoing. If we are successful, we intend to pursue obtaining reimbursement codes and to target completion of partnerships with leading catheter product companies for sales and marketing efforts in the United States. The Company has entered into recent distribution partnerships for UroShield in the United States, U.K., Switzerland, Israel, India, and New Zealand.

In addition, we continue to expand our clinical development and marketing efforts in North America with respect to PainShield. In February 2018, we completed a clinical trial to evaluate the effect of PainShield in patients with trigeminal neuralgia. The double blinded, crossover trial was conducted across the United States and included 59 patients with a diagnosis of unilateral trigeminal neuralgia. Among the 59 patients, 30 were in the active treatment group and 29 were in the control group. The values which were assessed include Visual Analog Scale (“VAS”) pain score, both baseline prior to trial and VAS pain score at the end of the study. The study also assessed breakthrough medications per week at the start of the trial and breakthrough medications per week at the end of the trial, with a particular focus on the use of opioids. Breakthrough medications are used for chronic pain directly related to the pre-existing trigeminal neuralgia condition. There was a significant difference in the outcomes of the two groups relative to pain, quality of life, and breakthrough medications taken, which was directly correlated to pain experienced during treatment. Specifically, the control group saw an improvement in baseline scores of 2.3% versus the treatment group, which saw a 55.2% improvement in baseline scores. Additionally, the control group saw a reduction in breakthrough pain medication of 1.5% versus the treatment group, which saw a 46.4% reduction in breakthrough pain medication.

In 2019, the Company has completed a study which was intended to assess the PainShield’s ability to effectively treat Lateral Epicondylitis (Tennis Elbow). This is a double blinded, randomized control trial. The study has been completed and awaiting submission to an appropriate journal. The interim results were reported as follows:

	●	70% of patients using PainShield experienced complete resolution or significant improvement in symptoms without the use of opioids; and
	●	PainShield had no adverse events or complications and was deemed both safe and effective.

The Company has entered into distribution partnerships for PainShield in the United States, Israel, India, Italy, United Kingdom, and Switzerland.

WoundShield has been evaluated in two published clinical studies done to-date that suggest improved localized blood flow and oxygenation, and improved topical oxygen saturation (Morykwas M, “Oxygen Therapy with Surface Acoustic Waveform Sonication,” European Wound Management Association 2011; Covington S, “Ultrasound-Mediated Oxygen Delivery to Lower Extremity Wounds,” Wounds 2012; 24(8)). We supplied devices for these studies but had no further involvement with them. We are pursuing licensing opportunities to develop commercial markets for the WoundShield product.

Recent Developments

Effective as of January 2020, the U.S. CMS approved our PainShield™ for reimbursement for Medicare beneficiaries on a national basis. We were notified on March 30, 2020 that our Medicare Enrollment Application was approved, and we are now an approved Medicare Supplier for DME through the National Supplier Clearinghouse, Palmetto-GBA as well as Noridian Administrative Services, LLC, the two Medicare Administrative Contractors that handle DME reimbursement nationwide. PainShield is currently available for Medicare reimbursement on a national level under new HCPCS (Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System) code K1004, as discussed above.

In March 2020, we signed a license agreement with Sanuwave Health, Inc. (“Sanuwave”) for the manufacture and delivery of our WoundShield technology. Under the terms of the agreement, we will receive warrants to purchase 127,000 shares of Sanuwave stock, a $250,000 milestone payment based on receipt of U.S. Food and Drug Administration approval, and 10% royalty on Sanuwave’s gross revenues from sales or rentals of WoundShield. In return, Sanuwave has received the worldwide, exclusive rights to our WoundShield product and technology. In addition, Sanuwave will bear the costs and clinical validation responsibilities associated with obtaining approval for WoundShield from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and other regulatory agencies around the world, as discussed above.

Business Model

All of our products consist of a reusable controller device and a disposable component, or transducer. The controllers have a life expectancy of up to three years, while the disposable transducer has a life expectancy of up to a month and must be replaced to provide the intended therapy. The components are purchased by either the distributor or end user for use in any of the intended applications. Once the controller is purchased by the end user, recurring revenue will be realized by purchases of replacement transducers to the extent that the end user continues treatment with our product.

Our products are intended to be distributed both by independent distributors as well as by potential licensees. Distributor cost is discounted to account for their intended margins, based upon purchase volumes and/or periodic purchase commitments, with the disposable transducer sold and distributed in the same fashion. We currently have an established distributor network and are implementing certain criteria within such network to ensure the appropriate assignment of a distributor or licensee. We also intend to add additional distributors to our network.

In August 2019, we established our first license agreement with Medisana, Inc. (“Medisana”) with a total of 1,500 devices that was shipped to Medisana directly from China, in April 2020. The devices were designed to carry the product labeling specific to the Medisana brand, with the product name of PT100. The product labeling includes the words, “PAINSHIELD Ultrasonic therapy, Medisana”. All instructions for use and packaging are specific to Medisana.

In December 2020, we amended and restated our original distribution agreement with Ultra Pain Products, Inc. (“UPPI”). Under the terms of the new agreement, which extend the term and increase minimum purchase requirements, UPPI will be the exclusive distributor of privately labeled PainShield® and PainShield® Plus^TM devices to the Durable Medical Equipment (DME) distribution sector of the healthcare market in the United States. By this new private label agreement, we have expanded our revenue opportunity with UPPI, effectively increasing what was an initial revenue target of $1.1 million over two years to $7.8 million over three years.

Our business plan continues to focus on these types of transactions/agreements. We continue to focus on the foundational aspects of each respective product, including the design and performance of each, the reimbursement, regulatory status, and quality control, in order to strengthen our position with prospective partners.

Ultrasound Technology and Our Products

As noted above, our primary products are based on the use of low frequency ultrasound, which delivers energy through mechanical vibrations in the form of sound waves. Ultrasound has long been used in physical therapy, physical medicine, rehabilitation and sports medicine.

Our proprietary technology consists of a small, thin (1 millimeter) transducer that is capable of transmitting ultrasonic acoustic waves onto treatment surfaces with a radius of up to 10 centimeters beyond the transducer. This technology allows us to treat wounds by implanting our transducers into a small, portable self-adhering acoustic patch, thereby eliminating the need for technicians and medical personnel to manually administer ultrasound therapy, which should reduce the cost of therapy. Moreover, we believe that, based upon the body of evidence, the delivery of ultrasound through our portable devices is equal to or more effective than existing competitive products, as our technology is better positioned to target the affected areas of the body.

While there are currently a number of products on the market that treat pain through ultrasound therapy, we believe that our products differentiate themselves because they are portable, without the requirement to be plugged into an outlet and they have a frequency of 100kHz (in contrast to other devices, which have a frequency of 1MHz), which means our products do not produce heat that can damage tissue. Our products can therefore (i) be self-administered by the patient without the need to be moved about the treated area by the patient or a clinician, (ii) be applied for a significantly longer period without the risk of tissue damage and (iii) do not require the use of gel. We are aware of one competitive product with similar ultrasound technology, the SAM® Sport4 by a company called Zetroz Systems LLC, aka ZetrOz, Inc. However, it is our belief that this product does not generate surface acoustic waves as our products do, the treatment area is generally limited to that of the transducer’s diameter, the use of transmission gel is still required and the transducer thickness is significantly greater than ours (approximately 1.5cm). To our knowledge, the device only provides a battery life of 4 hours and is continuous therapy versus intermittent therapy.

There has been an article published in 2019 on SAM® Sport4 regarding clinical evidence demonstrating that ultrasound dose timing (i.e. daily treatment) and duration significantly impact benefits and treatment results, we are aware of a prospective randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled study on the effects of the long-duration low-intensity ultrasound treatment using SAM® Sport4 suggesting that ultrasound may be used as a conservative non-pharmaceutical and non-invasive treatment option for patients with knee osteoarthritis.

In general, ultrasound offers the benefits by increasing local blood circulation, increasing vascular wall permeability, promoting protein secretion, promoting enzymatic reactions, accelerating nitric oxide production, promoting angiogenesis (the formation of new blood vessels from pre-existing vessels) and promoting fibroblast proliferation (fibroblasts are a type of cell that play a critical role in wound healing). We believe that the body of evidence, and the positive therapeutic effect that ultrasound has for various indications, potentially provides for future product development opportunities for us.

Traditional ultrasound device and our portable ultrasound patch-based device and a comparison of their energy distribution, where the X-axis represents treatment surface and the Y-axis represents ultrasound energy penetration depth within tissue.

In a comparison of a traditional ultrasound device and our portable ultrasound patch-based device, the bulk wave conventional ultrasound machines with handheld transducers distribute the energy deeply into the body, as shown above in diagram (A) on the left. In comparison, our device distributes the energy on the surface, as shown in diagram (B), thereby meaningfully increasing the treatment area. Our transducers may also be incorporated into treatment patches, including patches that are designed to deliver medicine and other compounds through the skin. The generation and delivery of low frequency ultrasound over a period of time to a specific area has been termed “targeted slow-release ultrasound”. We believe that this delivery method of ultrasound may be comparable to that of slow release medication in the pharmaceutical industry. This “targeted slow-release” capability is intended to allow for more frequent targeting of the intended treatment area and thus may result in a more effective therapeutic response.

Micro Vibrations Technology and Our Products

It is well established that increasing blood flow to the wound and peri-wound area helps accelerate the healing of ischemic wounds. Micro-vibrations applied on the skin tissue increase local blood flow and oxygen delivery to the wound area and stimulate angiogenesis and growth factors that are helpful for the wound healing process. Vibration therapy has been found to stimulate blood flow due to mechanical stresses of endothelial cells resulting in increased production of nitric oxide and vasodilation, as well as increase soft tissue and skin circulation. (Maloney-Hinds et al., “The Role of Nitric Oxide in Skin Blood Flow Increases due to vibration in healthy adults and adults with type 2 diabetes,” School of Medicine, Loma Linda University. Ca. Diabetes Technology & Therapeutics, 2009 p. 39-43). In addition, micro vibrations induce skin surface nerve axon reflex and type IIa muscle fibers contraction rates, resulting in vasodilation (Nakagami et al., “Effect of vibration on skin blood flow in an in vivo microcirculatory model”, The University of Tokyo, Bio-Science Trends 2007; 1 (3): 161-166). Ten minutes of vibration therapy with laser doppler revealed a consistent increase in water content of the upper dermis (TJ Ryan et al., “The effect of mechanical forces (vibration or external compression) on the dermal water content of the upper dermis and epidermis, assessed by high frequency ultrasound”, Oxford Wound Healing Institute, Journal of Tissue Viability, 2001. In another study, mean blood flow increase was higher in the vibration group than the placebo group. Improvements in local blood flow may be beneficial in the therapeutic alleviation of pain or other symptoms resulting from acute or chronic injuries (C. Button et al., “The effect of multidirectional mechanical vibration on peripheral circulation of humans”, University of Otago New Zealand, Clinical Physiology and functional Imaging, 2007 27, p211-216). A study on the effect of whole body vibration on lower extremity skin blood flow suggests, that short duration vibration alone significantly increases lower extremity skin blood flow, doubling skin blood for a minimum of 10 minutes following treatment (Lohman et al., “The effect of whole body vibration on lower extremity skin blood flow in normal subjects”, Department of Physical Therapy, Loma Linda university, USA, Med Sci Monit, 2007; 13(2) 71-76). Vibration has also been shown to stimulate angiogenesis and growth factors such as vascular endothelial growth factor (Suhr F et al., “Effects of short-term vibration and hypoxia during high intensity cycling exercise on circulating level of angiogenic regulators in humans”, J Appl Physiol, 2007, 103:474-483, Yue Z. et al., “On the cardiovascular effects of whole-body vibration I. Longitudinal effects: hydrodynamic analysis”, Studies Appl Math, 2007, 119:95-109). Of import with respect to diabetic wounds, in which a prolonged inflammatory phase occurs, vibration vasodilation has generated an indirect anti-inflammatory action, mainly by suppression of nuclear factor-kβ, the key gene for inflammatory mediators (Sackner, M.A., “Nitric Oxide is released into circulation with whole-body, periodic acceleration”, Chest 2005;127;30-39).

Urinary catheter usage is associated with pain and discomfort caused by the friction between the catheter surface and the urethral tissue. Generally, this friction is treated by applying lubricating gels and low friction catheter coatings. These methods are effective for a short term during the catheter insertion as the lubricating gel is quickly absorbed into the surrounding tissue and loses its effect and the catheter coatings lose their lubricity within a few days, as the coating is covered by a thin film of mucous.

Our UroShield product provides vibrations along the surface of the urinary catheter that is in contact with urethral tissue. We believe that these vibrations create a continuous acoustic lubrication effect along the surface of the indwelling catheter that is in contact with the surrounding tissue, thus reducing catheter-tissue contact time, which may lessen trauma from urethra abrasion and adhesion. We have also shown in animals and in humans that the micro-vibration technology can reduce the level of biofilm formation on urinary catheters.

Our Products

Product Design, Packaging, Identity

All products were redesigned in the fourth quarter 2019, with an updated look and improved performance. These new designs were coupled with new branding, packaging, instructional manuals, and marketing materials. Beginning in the fourth quarter of 2019, our manufacturers in China have commenced producing the redesigned products for distribution and delivered their first completed units in April 2020.

UroShield

UroShield is intended to prevent bacterial colonization and biofilm formation, increase antibiotic efficacy in the catheter lumen and decrease pain and discomfort associated with urinary catheter use. It is designed to be used with any type of indwelling urinary catheter regardless of the material or coating. We believe that UroShield may be the first medical device on the market that attempts to simultaneously address all of the aforementioned catheter-related issues. UroShield is similar in design to WoundShield and PainShield, in that it uses a driver unit that produces low frequency, low intensity ultrasound. The driver unit connects to a disposable transducer that is clipped onto the external portion of the catheter to deliver ultrasound therapy to all catheter surfaces as well as the tissue surrounding the catheter.

Picture of UroShield with actuator

We believe the UroShield system has the following advantageous effects:

	●	Prevention or Reduction of Biofilm. The low frequency ultrasound generated by UroShield has been shown to decrease adherence of bacteria to catheter surfaces, thereby reducing biofilm. Biofilm is the complex matrix required for bacteria to grow and cause infection. See the discussion of our Heidelberg 1 trial below.

	●	Decreased Catheter Associated Pain and Discomfort. We believe that UroShield creates an acoustic envelope on the surfaces of the catheter, which decreases friction and tissue trauma, pain and discomfort caused by the catheter. In addition, in vivo (rabbit) studies have shown the tissue in contact with the catheter remains healthier and less traumatized as a result of the application of low frequency and low intensity ultrasound (Applebaum I, et.al., “The Effect of Acoustic Energy Induced By UroShield on Foley Catheter Related Trauma and Inflammation in a Rabbit Model” Department of Urology, Shaarey Zedek Medical Center and the Hadassah Hebrew University Medical School).

	●	Acoustically Augmented Antibiotic Therapy. Antibiotic resistance in biofilm bacteria is a well-known phenomenon. Although it has been known that ultrasound can increase antibiotic efficacy in in-vitro models, we do not believe that there has been a practical ultrasound-based medical device that was able to augment antibiotic efficacy in the clinical setting. In a clinical study, UroShield technology has been shown to eradicate biofilm-residing bacteria by greater than 85% when applied simultaneously with an antibiotic in three clinically relevant species, escherichia coli, staphylococcus epidermidis and pseudomonas aeruginosa (Banin E, et al., “Surface acoustic waves increase the susceptibility of Pseudomonas aeruginosa biofilms to antibiotic treatment,” Biofouling, August 2011; we supplied devices for this study, but had no further involvement with it).

	●	Preservation of the Patency of Catheters. We believe that low frequency ultrasound applied to catheters will add an anti-clogging effect and will preserve patency of catheters. This effect is achieved by ultrasound waves creating an acoustic layer on the inner lumen of the urinary catheter, thereby preventing adherence of biological material and biofilm formation. We believe that this anti-clogging benefit will help prevent local infection and sepsis secondary to catheter obstruction.

UroShield has undergone a number of clinical trials. The Heidelberg 1 trial, conducted in 2005-2006, which we sponsored, was a 22 patient randomized, double blind, sham-controlled, independent trial that tested UroShield’s safety and ability to prevent biofilm in patients with an indwelling Foley catheter. The trial demonstrated that UroShield prevented biofilm in all patients with the active device as compared to biofilm being found in seven of eleven of the control patients. In addition, there was a marked decrease in pain, discomfort and spasm in the active UroShield patients, as evidenced by a statistically significant decrease in the requirement for the medications required to treat urinary catheter associated pain and discomfort (Ikinger U, “Biofilm Prevention by Surface Acoustic Nanowaves: A New Approach to Urinary Tract Infections?,” 25th World Congress of Endourology and SWL, Cancun, Mexico, October 2007).

In a subsequent physician-sponsored trial, known as Heidelberg 2, conducted in 2007, 40 patients who underwent radical prostatectomies were divided into two groups, with the active group receiving one intra-operative dose of antibiotics and UroShield and the control group receiving one intra-operative dose of antibiotics and then five subsequent doses over three days. At the end of the trial, the control group had four cases of bacteriuria, as compared to one in the active group. In a third trial, a physician-sponsored open label trial, 10 patients who received emergency placement of a urinary catheter due to acute obstruction were given a UroShield device and followed with regard to their pain, discomfort, spasm and overall well-being. Within 24 hours, all patients showed improvement and increased toleration of the catheter (Zillich S., Ikinger U, “Biofilmprävention durch akustische Nanowellen: Ein neuer Aspekt bei katheterassoziierten Harnwegsinfektionen?,” Gesellschaft für Urologie, Heilbronn, Germany, May 2008). We supplied devices for this trial, but had no further involvement with it.

As recently announced, the Company submitted to The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, for review, the findings from an independent evaluation of its UroShield® device on patients who had used the device for up to two years. Clinical data from the study conducted by Coventry University’s Assistant Professor, Ksenija Maravic da Silva, during 2020 reported statistically significant outcomes for the device including a reduced number of urinary tract infections (UTIs), reduced instances of prescribed antibiotics, reduced catheter blockages, reduced the need for unplanned catheter changes and reduced pain reported as a result of catheter associated complications. The study also provided important insights into the lives of those using the device including improvement of overall well-being, relating specifically to decreased levels of worry and increased ability to socialize. In addition, patient feedback on product improvements was addressed and has been incorporated in the present commercially available device.

Market for UroShield

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, urinary tract infection (UTI) is an infection involving any part of the urinary system, including urethra, bladder, ureters, and kidney. UTIs are the most common type of healthcare-associated infection reported to the National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN). Among UTIs acquired in the hospital, approximately 75% are associated with a urinary catheter, which is a tube inserted into the bladder through the urethra to drain urine. Between 15-25% of hospitalized patients receive urinary catheters during their hospital stay. The most important risk factor for developing a catheter-acquired urinary tract infection (CAUTI) is prolonged use of the urinary catheter.

This study was written up in the December 2018 issue of “Medical & Surgical Urology”, a leading peer-reviewed journal in the field of urology.

Approximately 15-25% of patients who are admitted to a hospital will have an indwelling catheter at some point during their stay and 7% of nursing home residents are managed by long term catheterization.

CAUTI is the most common nosocomial infection in hospitals and nursing homes, representing over 40% of all hospital-acquired infections (HAIs) and 20% of intensive care unit HAIs (Maki, P and Tambyah, D. Engineering Out the Risk for Infection with Urinary Catheters., Emerging Infectious Diseases., Vol. 7, No. 2, March–April 2001). In addition, CAUTIs are the source for approximately 20% of healthcare acquired bacteremia in acute care and 50% in long-term care facilities (Nicolle, Lindsay E. “Catheter Associated Urinary Tract Infections.” Antimicrobial Resistance and Infection Control 3 (2014). The risk of acquiring CAUTI depends on the method and duration of catheterization and patient susceptibility. Patients requiring a urinary catheter have a daily risk of approximately five percent of developing bacteriuria and approximately 25% of patients develop nosocomial bacteriuria or candiduria over one week (Maki, P and Tambyah, D. Engineering Out the Risk for Infection with Urinary Catheters., Emerging Infectious Diseases., Vol. 7, No. 2, March–April 2001). Virtually all patients requiring indwelling urinary catheters for longer than a month become bacteriuric.

CAUTI occurs because urethral catheters inoculate organisms into the bladder and promote colonization by providing a surface for bacterial adhesion and causing mucosal irritation. The presence of a urinary catheter is the most important risk factor for bacteriuria. Once a catheter is placed, the daily incidence of bacteriuria is 3-10%. Between 10% and 30% of patients who undergo short-term catheterization (i.e., 2-4 days) develop bacteriuria and are asymptomatic. Between 90% and 100% of patients who undergo long-term catheterization develop bacteriuria. About 80% of nosocomial UTIs are related to urethral catheterization; only 5-10% are related to genitourinary manipulation. (John L. Brusch, Catheter-Related Urinary Tract Infection, Medscape, August 18, 2015).

The global catheter market size was valued at USD 37.3 billion in 2018 and is expected to witness a CAGR of 9.7% through 2026. Rising prevalence of chronic disorders leading to hospitalization has fueled the growth of this market. Presence of multi-national manufacturers, improving medical facilities, supportive insurance policies are also some of the key factors propelling the market growth. North America is the largest regional market due to the presence of multi-national manufacturers and sophisticated healthcare infrastructure along with high product awareness levels. Asia Pacific is projected to expand at the maximum CAGR of 10.4%, over the study period. According to a Grandview research report published 2018, there are 25 million Foley catheters sold annually in the United States and 75 million catheters sold elsewhere yielding a total global Foley catheter market of 100 million units worldwide. The cost to treat a simple CAUTI has been estimated at $13,793 per case (AHRQ), and the cost of treating bacteremia has been estimated at $8,355 (NIH) per case, yielding a total healthcare burden of $830 million per year. While there are currently both antibiotic and silver coated catheters in the market, they often sell for approximately $10 above the non-antimicrobial equivalent.

In addition, as of October 1, 2008, Medicare stopped authorizing its payment to hospitals in which patients have developed a catheter-associated urinary tract infection that was not present on admission. This provides hospitals in the United States with a substantial financial incentive to reduce the occurrence of such infections through the use of products such as UroShield, which help prevent infections hospitals would otherwise have to treat without reimbursement. In addition, it has been noted that the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services may fine hospitals in the future when their patients develop CAUTI, which will likely increase the incentive of hospitals to invest in technologies that may prevent this complication (Brown J, et al. “Never Events: Not Every Hospital-Acquired Infection Is Preventable, Clinical Infectious Diseases, 2009, 49 (5)).

Competition for UroShield

Several types of products have been introduced to address the growing problem of catheter-acquired infection and biofilm formation on catheter surfaces. Manufacturers offer antibiotic-coated and antiseptic-impregnated catheters. In addition, manufacturers have produced silver-coated catheters, which have been shown in small studies to delay bacteriuria for about two to four days. However, larger studies did not corroborate this result; on the contrary, silver hydrogel was associated with overgrowth of gram positive bacteria in the urine (Riley DK, Classen DC, “A large randomized clinical trial of a silver-impregnated urinary catheter: lack of efficacy and staphylococcal superinfection,” Am. J. Med. 1995 April; 98(4):349-56).

UroShield has been designed to be added to any type of catheter, including Foley catheters and silver-coated catheters, to improve a catheter’s infection prevention performance. UroShield is not intended to replace any existing products or technologies, but instead is intended to assist these existing products or technologies in preventing catheter-acquired urinary injury and catheter associated complications. While UroShield has been approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) under Enforcement Discretion during the COVID-19 health emergency, if we do not obtain permanent clearance from the FDA, UroShield may be unable to successfully compete in this market due to an inability to obtain such permanent clearance from the FDA and failure to be adopted by health care practitioners and facilities.

Regulatory Strategy

UroShield received CE Mark approval in September 2007 and was also approved for sale by the Israeli Ministry of Health in 2008. We are able to sell UroShield in India and Ecuador based on our CE Mark. UroShield was granted a Canadian medical device license in September 2016, although, due to a modification of regulatory standards in Canada, we have lost our Canadian license. We are working toward reinstatement of our Canadian license. To that extent, we passed an audit in November 2020 with a notified body and we are waiting on a certificate.

In the European Union, UroShield has been marketed for the prevention of biofilm, decreased pain and discomfort associated with urinary catheters and increased antibiotic efficacy.

In September 2020, the FDA exercised its Enforcement Discretion to allow distribution of the UroShield device in the United States. According to the FDA, “UroShield® device can use Intended Use Code (IUC) 081.006: Enforcement discretion per final guidance, and FDA product code QMK (extracorporeal acoustic wave generating accessory to urological indwelling catheter for use during the COVID-19 pandemic)”.

Accordingly, the FDA’s Enforcement Discretion clears the way for import of UroShield to the U.S. during the Covid-19 pandemic, immensely expanding the company’s addressable market for the device during this time period. The device is designed to aid in the prevention of CAUTI incidence in patients requiring long-term indwelling catheterization.

After reviewing the body of scientific evidence that we presented, the FDA took decisive action to clear the way for patient access to UroShield for the duration of the Covid-19 pandemic. The evidence presented to the FDA on UroShield demonstrated decreases in the risk of catheter-associated urinary tract infections and related complications in patients using UroShield who required long-term indwelling catheterization. Importantly, we are unaware of any other commercially available device that can prevent catheter-associated urinary tract infection incidence and achieve results comparable to UroShield.

We intend to seek 510K clearance from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration through the de novo classification process for UroShield. We are currently seeking advice from the FDA prior to submission.

Studies completed to establish safety of UroShield for human use:

●

A large animal model (female sheep) study has been conducted to establish local tissue response from a urinary catheter with UroShield attached as compared to a control group of animals with a urinary catheter with no UroShield attached.

The pre-clinical animal study was intended to demonstrate safety of UroShield device when used for 30-days with a urinary catheter. The study compared local tissue and organ response in two groups of 4 (female) sheep where one group was catheterized (urethral) using an uncoated silicone Foley catheter (only) and the other group was catheterized using an uncoated silicone Foley catheter with UroShield device attached to it. All catheters were identical in their size, material composition and manufacturer.

After 30 days the animals were euthanized and local tissue and organs were examined. The results showed the group with UroShield device had fewer observations of swelling, redness or discharge at the vulva as compared to the group without UroShield. The animals did not exhibit signs of discomfort or pain during study period (of 30 days). The gross and histopathology findings were also very similar between the two groups.

●

A comparative study of leachables from a urinary catheter with and without UroShield attached has been performed to demonstrate that the leachables with UroShield attached do not exceed toxicological safe limits allowed for a medical device.

The chemical characterization of leachables was intended to demonstrate safety for UroShield device for 30-day use with a urinary catheter. The study compared leachables from a group consisting of 3 uncoated silicone catheters with leachables from a group consisting of 3 uncoated silicone catheters with UroShield attached to it. All catheters were identical in their size, material composition and manufacturer.

The exhaustive extractions were performed with non-polar, polar and aqueous solvents. An additional simulated use extraction using Saline and Ethanol was performed. Overall the extractables from both groups were comparable and toxicological evaluation showed that all compounds from extraction with UroShield were below the tolerable exposure limits. Most of compounds had a margin of safety greater than 10 and 4 compounds had margin of safety between 1.5 and 10. Overall, the toxicological risk for using UroShield with a urinary catheter is similar and at even lower as compared to a catheter without UroShield attached.

Sales and Marketing

Since the FDA exercised its Enforcement Discretion to allow the distribution of the UroShield device in the United States, we have been actively seeking partnerships for marketing our product in the United States. We believe the business opportunity for UroShield is in the hundreds of millions in U.S. dollars to the extent that UroShield obtains permanent 510(k) clearance from the FDA, is recognized as effective and becomes widely adopted for use in catheters. To that end, we are seeking a strategic partnership with various companies which have an existing “footprint” in the Urology market. Those discussions and negotiations are ongoing at this time. We have appointed distributors for UroShield in the United Kingdom and, and an outside management organization, Morulaa Health, to assist with regulatory matters and distribution of UroShield in India. Each of these distributors is paid a small retainer and will be paid a commission between 10 to 20% of sales going forward. Total payments to these distributors totaled under $10,000 in 2020.

We announced in May 2020, that we had expanded our license agreement with Ideal Medical International Limited to include exclusive rights to distribute the Company’s UroShield® and PainShield® technologies in Canada and Turkey.

From time to time we have had interest from strategic companies in the catheter market to partner, license or acquire the UroShield technology. These strategic partners are active in the urology market and may be interested in integrating UroShield as an accessory, into its range of products. Discussions with these partners are ongoing.

Clinical Trials

To date, we have conducted the clinical trials set forth below:

Purpose	Doctor/Location	Time, subjects	Objectives	Results
To assess the safety of the UroShield Double Blind, Comparative, Randomized Study for the Safety Evaluation of the UroShield System (HD1)	Dr. U. Ikinger, Salem Academic Hospital, University of Heidelberg, Germany	2005-2006 22 patients	To demonstrate that the use of the UroShield is safe and that the device is well tolerated by the patients and user friendly to the medical staff. Efficacy objectives were to demonstrate that the UroShield helps in prevention of biofilm formation in comparison with the urinary catheter alone, as well as bacteriuria.	UroShield was both safe and well tolerated. UroShield proved efficacious in prevention of biofilm. Subjects required significantly less medications than the control group for catheter related pain and discomfort.
Double Blind, Comparative, Randomized Study for the Safety Evaluation of the UroShield System (HD2 ) Physician initiated	Dr. U. Ikinger, Salem Academic Hospital, University of Heidelberg, Germany	2007 40 patients	To demonstrate that the use of the UroShield is safe and helps in prevention of biofilm formation and UTI in comparison with the urinary catheter alone, as well as decrease antibiotic use.	In this trial, only 1/20 patients in UroShield device (no antibiotics) group developed urinary tract infection compared to 4/20 patients within control group treated with the antibiotic prophylaxis alone.

The Effect of UroShield on Pain and Discomfort in Patients Released from the Emergency Room with Urinary Catheter Due to Urine Incontinence Physician initiated	Shaare Zedek Medical Center Jerusalem, Israel.	2007 10 patients	The study aimed to assess the effectiveness of the UroShield in reducing pain and discomfort levels and improve the well-being of the subjects. Efficacy objectives included reduction of pain, spasm, burning and itching sensation levels of the subjects.	The results demonstrated a reduction in pain, itching, burning and spasm levels. Additionally, the well-being of the subjects showed a significant increase.

The Use of the UroShield Device in Patients with Indwelling Urinary Catheters Open labeled, comparative, randomized study	Dr. Shenfeld Shaare Zedek Medical Center Jerusalem, Israel.	2007-2009 40 patients	Patient complaints related to catheter regarding pain according to VAS scale and discomfort according to 0-10 scale Presence of Clinically Significant UTI Presence of Bacteriuria Presence of Biofilm Use of medication	UroShield device was effective in reducing postoperative catheter related pain discomfort and bladder spasms. There was also a notable trend towards reduction of bacteriuria.

Purpose	Doctor/Location	Time, subjects	Objectives	Results
Evaluation of the UroShield in urinary and nephrostomies to reduce bacteriuria Physician initiated	Prof. P.Tenke, Hungary	2010-2011 27 patients	● Pain, disability and QOL ● Catheter patency ● Bacteriuria / UTI ● Hospitalization period ● Analgesics and Antibiotics intake	Showed reduction in pain and significant decrease in bacteriuria rate.

Double Blind, Randomized Control Study for Prevention of Bacterial Colonization and UTI associated with Indwelling Urinary Catheters	Dr. Shira Markowitz Buffalo, NY	2017 55 patients	To demonstrate the use of the UroShield reduces bacterial colonization on the urinary catheter	Final results entitled “The Effect of Surface Acoustic Waves on Bacterial Load and Preventing Catheter-Associated Urinary Tract Infections (CAUTI) in Long Term Indwelling Catheters,” which was published in the December 2018 issue of Medical & Surgical Urology, a leading peer-reviewed journal in the field of urology.
				Mean improvement advantage in treatment vs control was 87.2K CFU, (t (53) 18.1, p<0.001) at thirty days. At 60 days the mean improvement advantage in treatment vs control was 87.5K CFU, (t (53) 18.1, p<0.001). At 90 days the mean improvement advantage in treatment vs control was 79.3K CFU, (t (53) 12.4, p<0.001).

Purpose

Doctor/Location

Time,

subjects

Objectives

Results

After cessation of treatment in the active group at 30 days, there was a minimal increase in CFU count at both 60 and 90 days. In the same group, there was no statistical difference in the decrease of CFU count from 30 to 60 days after treatment, t (28)=1. p= .326, however there was a marginally significant increase in CFU from 60 to 90 days for the active group (28)=1.7 p= 0.09.

At baseline, every enrolled patient had been treated for infection during the 90 days prior to enrollment. Compared to baseline, the treatment group showed significant statistical and clinical improvement (100%) at 30 days relative to the sham control (73%). There were no reported infections in the Treatment Group while in the control group there were seven reported infections.

At 90 days after treatment, the treatment group showed a significantly stronger improvement (89.7%) compared to the sham control (46.2%). There were three reported infection in the Treatment group, while in the control group there were fourteen reported infections requiring antimicrobial therapy. (logistic regression B=2.3, Wald Chi-Square (df=1) =10.1, p=0.001.)

Purpose

Doctor/Location

Time,

subjects

Objectives

Results

UroShield Randomized Control trial

5 different nursing facilities

2017 - 2018

51 subjects

51 subjects were evaluated with 26 in the active/treatment group and 25 in the control group. All patients had been treated for at least one incident of a catheter-acquired urinary tract infection (CAUTI) requiring antibiotics in the preceding 6 months prior to trial initiation.

At the 90-day evaluation, 13 of 25 subjects (52%) in the control group developed a CAUTI requiring systemic antibiotics while only 1 of 26 patients (4%) in the UroShield™ group required antibiotic. All study subjects had an initial colony count of greater than 100,000 CFU cultured from their urinary tract. At thirty days, all subjects within the control group showed no change in the number of their bacteria count which was greater than 100,000 CFU, while those in the treatment group showed a reduction to 10,000 CFU in 15 of 26 subjects and only 1,000 CFU in 10 of 26 subjects, proving a decrease in both bacterial colonization and the incidence of Urinary Tract Infection.

Recently Completed, Current, Ongoing and Planned Clinical Trial

In July 2019, a 23 -patient trial was completed in Norwich, United Kingdom. The trial was initiated to satisfy the requirements for adoption within the UK National Health Service. Results of the trial have not been published. The hospital that completed the patient trial continues to use the UroShield device.

In September 2019, an economic impact study was performed completed by York Health Economic Consortium, United Kingdom to determine the cost savings related to prevention of urinary tract infection. The study resulted in an economic impact “model” which will demonstrate cost savings to prevention of patients contracting UTI. The trial was initiated to satisfy the requirements for adoption within the UK National Health Service.

In April 2019, an in vitro study was performed at Southampton University, Southampton, United Kingdom, to determine the effect of UroShield on bacterial colonization in a laboratory setting. The trial was initiated to satisfy the requirements for adoption within the UK National Health Service. This trial will also be helpful to fulfill a requirement of the FDA. Results revealed positive results to all others studied in the same laboratory.

UroShield-In vivo study is being conducted by Dr. Blayne Welk MD MSc and Dr. Jeremy Burton MSc PhD. The study, entitled “Low energy surface waves to prevent urinary infections and catheter associated symptoms among patients with neurogenic bladder dysfunction”. The intent is to conduct a pilot study to determine if the UroShield device can reduce catheter symptoms, improve urinary quality of life, and reduce catheter biofilm formation and bacteriuria among patients with neurogenic bladder dysfunction and an indwelling catheter. The study is ongoing but the recruitment has slowed due to the Covid-19 pandemic.

This study is being done without cost to NanoVibronix and is expected to be presented at the American Urologic Association in the fall.

If we are able to locate a strategic partner or otherwise obtain sufficient funding, we anticipate conducting the following clinical trial:

Trial

Place

Start Date/Timing

Objectives

UroShield U.S. Food and Drug Administration trial 80 patient trial

To be determined

Safety and efficacy of UroShield in urinary catheter related pain and infection and biofilm formation.

The results of previous clinical trials may not be predictive of future results, and the results of our planned clinical trial, if we are able to locate a strategic partner or otherwise obtain sufficient funding, may not satisfy the requirements of the FDA.

PainShield®

PainShield is an ultrasound device, consisting of a reusable driver unit and a disposable patch, which contains our proprietary therapeutic transducer. It delivers a localized ultrasound effect to treat pain and induce soft tissue healing in a targeted area, while keeping the level of ultrasound energy at a safe and consistent level of 0.4 watts. We believe that PainShield is the smallest and most portable therapeutic ultrasound device on the market and the only product in which the ultrasound transducer is integrated in a therapeutic disposable application patch.

The existing ultrasound therapy devices being used for pain reduction are primarily large devices used exclusively by clinicians in medical settings. PainShield is able to deliver ultrasound therapy without being located in a health care facility or clinic because it is portable, due to it being lightweight and battery operated. Because it is patch based and easy to apply, PainShield does not require medical personnel to apply ultrasound therapy to the patient. The patient benefits include ease of application and use, faster recovery time, high compliance, and increased safety and efficacy over existing devices that rely on higher-frequency ultrasound (Adahan M, et al, “A Sound Solution to Tendonitis: Healing Tendon Tears With a Novel Low-Intensity, Low-Frequency Surface Acoustic Ultrasound Patch,” American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Vol. 2, 685-687, July 2010). PainShield can be used by patients at home or work or in a clinical setting and can be used even while the patient is sleeping. Its range of applications includes acute and chronic pain reduction and anti-inflammatory treatment.

Picture of PainShield with Patch

PainShield is used to treat tendon disease and trigeminal neuralgia (a chronic pain condition that affects the trigeminal or 5th cranial nerve, one of the most widely distributed nerves in the head); previously, the therapeutic options for these disorders have been very limited. PainShield has also been used to treat pelvic and abdominal pain. To date, to the best of our knowledge, the only treatment options for these conditions are pain medication and surgery. Several additional causes of pain, and the treatment of that pain with the PainShield product, can be explored through clinical trials.

Market for PainShield

Pain-related complaints are one of the most common reasons patients seek treatment from physicians (Prince V, “Pain Management in Patients with Substance-Use Disorders,” Pain Management, PSAP-VII, Chronic Illnesses). According to Landro L, “New Ways to Treat Pain: Tricking the Brain, Blocking the Nerves in Patients When all Else Has Failed,” Wall Street Journal, May 11, 2010, approximately 26% of adult Americans, or approximately 76.5 million people, suffer from chronic pain. The National Center for Health Statistics has estimated that approximately 54% of the adult population experiences musculoskeletal pain. Studies have shown that low-frequency ultrasound treatment has yielded positive results for a variety of indications, including tendon injuries and short-term pain relief (Warden SJ, “A new direction for ultrasound therapy in sports medicine,” Sports Med. 2003; 33 (2):95-107), chronic low back pain (Ansari NN, Ebadi S, Talebian S, Naghdi S, Mazaheri H, Olyaei G, Jalaie SA, “Randomized, single blind placebo controlled clinical trial on the effect of continuous ultrasound on low back pain,” Electromyogr Clin Neurophysiol. 2006 Nov; 46(6):329-36) and sinusitis (Ansari NN, Naghdi S, Farhadi M, Jalaie S, “A preliminary study into the effect of low-intensity pulsed ultrasound on chronic maxillary and frontal sinusitis,” Physiother Theory Pract. 2007 Jul-Aug; 23(4):211-8). We believe that PainShield’s technology, portability and ease of use may result in it becoming an attractive product in the pain management and therapy field.

Competition

There are numerous products and approaches currently utilized to treat chronic pain. The pharmacological approach, which may be the most common, focuses on drug-related treatments with the over-the-counter internal analgesic market estimated at $19 billion in 2019. Alternatively, there are a large number of non-pharmacological pain treatment options available, such as ultrasound, transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation, or TENS, laser therapy and pulsed electromagnetic treatment. In addition, there are some technologies and devices in the market that utilize low frequency ultrasound or patch technology. Many patients are initially prescribed anti-pain medication; however, ongoing use of drugs may cause substantial side effects and lead to addiction. Therefore, patients and clinicians have shown increased interest in alternative pain therapy using medical devices that do not carry these side effects.

The currently available ultrasound treatments for chronic pain have generally been accepted by the medical community as standard treatment for pain management. However, the traditional ultrasound treatments, such as those manufactured or distributed by Mettler Electronics Corp, Metron USA and Zimmer MedizinSysteme, are stationary devices found only in clinics and other health care facilities that need to be administered to patients by health care professionals. We are aware of three companies that market smaller ultrasound devices capable of certain self-administered use for the treatment of pain: Koalaty Products, Inc., Sun-Rain System Corp. and PhysioTEC. These devices generally function in the same manner, at the same frequency and with the same administration and safety requirements and limitations as traditional, larger ultrasound devices. We are also aware of one product, the SAM® Sport4, which has recently received U.S. Food and Drug Administration approval and also has CE Mark approval, marketed by ZetrOZ, Inc., that we understand may eliminate certain of these requirements and limitations, namely the requirement to be plugged in, the need for movement around the treated area and the relatively short safe treatment period. However, we understand that this product does not generate surface acoustic waves as our products do, which means that the treatment area is generally limited to that under the transducer, that the use of transmission gel is still required and that the transducer thickness is significantly greater than ours (approximately 1.5cm). It is also our understanding that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has prohibited the manufacturer from labeling or promoting this product for use directly over bone that is near the skin surface. In addition, there are other patch-based methods of pain treatment, such as TENS therapy. TENS therapy may be painful and irritating for the patient due to the muscle contractions resulting from the electrical pulses. PainShield combines the efficacy of ultrasound treatment for pain with the ease of use and portability of a patch-based system. PainShield also may be self-administered by the patient, including while the patient is sleeping. However, if we are unable to obtain widespread insurance coverage and reimbursement for PainShield, its acceptance as a pain management treatment would likely be hindered, as patients may be reluctant to pay for the product out-of-pocket.

The CMS has approved PainShield for reimbursement for Medicare beneficiaries on a national basis effective January 2020.

Regulatory Strategy

PainShield received 510(k) clearance from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in August 2008 for treatment of pain relief. PainShield received CE Mark approval in July 2008 and was also approved for sale by the Israeli Ministry of Health in 2010. We are able to sell PainShield in India and Ecuador based on our CE Mark. We are in discussions with a distributor in Southeast Asia, and, if a distributor is engaged, intend to seek regulatory approvals for PainShield in Southeast Asia through such distributor.

In the United States, a prescription from a licensed healthcare practitioner is required for the use of PainShield. We have engaged a consultant to assist us in the process of reclassifying the next generation of PainShield devices to remove the prescription requirement for the use of PainShield. We believe that such reclassification will open up mass market opportunities which are currently not available to us due to the prescription requirement. However, there is no assurance that we will be able to remove the prescription requirement for the use of PainShield or that, even if we accomplish such reclassification and the use of PainShield no longer requires a prescription, PainShield will be successful commercially in the mass market or we will be able to generate significant revenues from the mass market opportunities, if any.

In order to eliminate the requirement for a physician prescription, proof of safety and consumer “usability” must be established. With no adverse events reported on the PainShield device, we have a high degree of confidence that we will achieve the desired outcome. We have engaged User-View, Inc to facilitate our Usability study. The product packaging and all instruction documents have been modified to meet OTC standards. That study was completed in 2019 with positive results.

In the United States, PainShield falls under the diathermy classification for the treatment of pain for initial reimbursement purposes. The permitted reimbursement codes can be used in the outpatient supervised medical setting. We intend to coordinate with the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and private insurers so that reimbursement can be extended to cover the administration of PainShield outside of health care facilities and clinics. In addition, we intend to conduct clinical trials in order to effectively market PainShield for a larger range of indications. The targeted reimbursement would be based upon specific indications, where study data serves as justification for payment.

Sales and Marketing

PainShield was introduced in 2009 as a treatment for pain, such as tendonitis, sports injuries, pelvic pain and neurologic pain and we have sold over 5,000 units since its introduction. We have entered into distribution agreements in United States, Europe, Asia and India for the distribution of PainShield. We intend to seek additional distribution opportunities in Europe, East Asia and Ecuador. In addition, we sell PainShield directly to patients through our website. We are currently ramping up our marketing efforts in the U.S. market and throughout the world to establish licensing and private label partnerships as well.

SEC Form 10-K filed by NanoVibronix, Inc.