Yahoo Finance

In May, we entered into a long-term lease agreement to build a commercial scale production facility in Philadelphia. And in June, we began construction. Third, our cervical cancer program is moving forward at an accelerated pace. We are extremely pleased to have received a Breakthrough Therapy designation from FDA for LN-145, and we now plan to submit a biologics license application or BLA for TIL therapy LN-145 in late 2020.

Now I will discuss these development programs in detail and provide an update on our corporate activities as we prepare to potentially commercialize while we further continue to evaluate the broad potential of TILL therapy in clinic. Our pivotal study of TIL therapy with lifileucel in the treatment of metastatic melanoma C-144-01 is progressing well. The results we presented at ASCO shows that lifileucel demonstrated an objective response rate, or ORR, of 38% in 66 patients. Response rate for current treatment in this patient population are typically between 4% and 10%, which means that lifileucel has a strong potential to become an important new treatment option for these patients.

As the data continues to mature, we know that the responses appear durable following a one-time treatment. At 8.8 months median follow up, a median duration of response or DOR has not been reached. We continue to expect a BLA submission for lifileucel by end of 2020. We are very pleased with the progress of our study of TIL therapy LN-145 in patients that have advanced cervical cancer C-145-04.

At ASCO, we reported early results in 27 patients, demonstrating an ORR of 44%. These results are highly encouraging. Available care for this patient population includes chemotherapy, response rates seeing the chemotherapy in second line metastatic cervical cancer is approximately 5% to 13%. Responses to LN-145 may be durable as the median DOR has not been reached at 7.4 months of median follow up.

In May, Iovance received Breakthrough Therapy designation for LN-145 from the FDA. In June of 2019, we met with FDA. The agency noted that the ongoing C-145-04 study may be sufficient to support registration of LN-145. These developments allow us to plan for regulatory submission using our ongoing study, which is now a pivotal registration-enabling program.

We have recently amended the protocol to increase the number of patients to 75. We plan to include in the BLA patients who have progressed following initial systemic therapy for recurrent or metastatic disease. In addition to the impressive results we have observed with TIL therapy in patients with late-stage disease, we also believe that there may be a clear potential for TIL therapy in the treatment of patients at earlier stages of treatment. Our evaluation of patients at early stages of disease currently involves a population of patients who have not experienced checkpoint inhibitor therapy.

In our study IOV-COM-202, we are enrolling patients that are naive to treatment with PD-1 inhibitors. This is a basket study evaluating TIL therapy LN-145 in combination with pembrolizumab in several indications, including PD-1 naive patients with melanoma or head and neck cancers. In April, we announced that a new arm of the basket study will be added to allow for treatment of PD-1/PD-L1 naive patients with non-small cell lung cancer indication with a combination of LN-145 and pembrolizumab. This cohort is now active.

Beyond solid tumors, we also see potential for our TIL technology platform in the treatment of hematologic cancers. As part of the collaboration with the Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, we are working to develop a cell therapy product for hematologic indications called peripheral blood lymphocyte or PBL therapy. At the Congress of the European Hematology Association or EHA in June, our advanced research study described the manufacturing and preclinical results for a PBL therapy, also called IOV-2001, as a treatment approach in chronic lymphocytic leukemia. PBL are different than CAR-T in that they are targeting multiple antigens associated with the patient disease.

CAR-T therapy targets one tumor cell surface antigen, the CD19. We have now demonstrated the ability to grow PBL cells for therapeutics use from 50 milliliters of blood in only nine days. Our plan is to begin clinical development for CLL in the population of patients with disease that has progressed following our treatment. We expect to file an investigation on new drug application or an IND before end of the year 2019.

We also continue to pursue opportunities to refine TIL therapy methods with the goal of developing further generations of commercial TIL therapy products that may have improved efficacy. One of these approaches to refinement is to investigate methods of selection of TIL therapy. Iovance believes that this approach to TIL therapy may offer improved potency paired with a good safety profile. Two projects are therefore being pursued in this direction, an internal program, as well a collaboration with CHUM.

In July 2019, we entered into a collaboration with the University of Montreal Health Centre, or CHUM, which has agreed to conduct clinical studies with PD-1 positive selected tumor-infiltrating lymphocyte or PD-1 positive TIL. In addition, this agreement with CHUM represents our expansion into Canada. We look forward to initiation of this collaboration. We also continued to build our corporate infrastructure as we prepare for regulatory submissions and potential commercialization.

We have expanded our management team by adding Dr. Friedrich Finckenstein as chief medical officer and expanded our board of directors. We have increased our manufacturing capacity with our current CMOs and have now dosed over 200 patients at Iovance. We are pleased to have entered into a long-term lease agreement for our own manufacturing facility to support broad access to TIL therapy.

This facility, located in Philadelphia, will be used for commercial and clinical production of autologous TIL products. We have also expanded our intellectual property portfolio with seven recently granted or allowed U.S. patents for composition and methods of treatment related to the use of TIL technology. In the next few months, we look forward to presenting at several conferences, including the Burque Global Conference in New York, the Wells Fargo Securities Healthcare Conference in Boston, the Alliance for Regenerative Medicine Cell & Gene Meeting in Mesa in California, and the Cantor Global Healthcare Conference in New York.

Finally, our financial position is strong. We believe that we have sufficient operating capital to complete our pivotal studies and file for regulatory approval for product in both advanced melanoma and advanced cervical cancer in late 2020. Now I would like to ask Tim to share an overview of our financial results. Tim?

Tim Morris -- Chief Financial Officer

Thank you, Maria. Our quarterly news release contains details of our financial results. Rather than read through all these details, my comments will address a few highlights. Net loss for the second-quarter 2019 was $47.6 million, or $0.38 per share, compared to a net loss of $30.7 million, or $0.34 per share, for the second quarter last year.

The increase in net loss for the quarter as compared to last year was due to higher spending as we continue enrollment in the pivotal study, prepare for the BLA filings and eventually commercialization. Specific higher expenses are due to increased headcount in both R&D and G&A. At quarter end, we had approximately 120 employees as compared to approximately 75 at June 30, 2018, increased spending on market research for both melanoma and cervical, additions to the IP estate and patent portfolio in the U.S. and worldwide, and an increase in manufacturing capacity in the U.S.

and Europe. Research and development expenses were $39.3 million for second-quarter 2019, an increase of $14.7 million, as compared to $24.6 million for the second-quarter 2018. General and administrative expenses were $10.9 million for the second quarter, an increase of $4.1 million, compared to the $6.8 million we had for the second-quarter 2018. Enrollment in the pivotal melanoma and cervical study has increased as compared to last year and over the first quarter this year.

We have increased manufacturing capacity to support this enrollment. We have also added headcount and begun pre-commercial activity in anticipation of BLA filings for these programs in late 2020. We anticipate that the level of spending for the second quarter of 2019 will continue at this level on a quarterly basis until enrollment in the pivotal studies is completed. Net loss for the six months ended June 30, 2019 was $84.5 million, or $0.68 per share, compared to a net loss of $57.2 million, or $0.65 per share, for the period ended June 30, 2018.

The increase in net loss for the first half of 2019 as compared to the first half of 2018 is due to the reasons discussed above. More employees, market research, new IP and additional manufacturing capacity. Research and development expenses were $70.2 million for the first half of 2019, an increase of $25.7 million, compared to $44.5 million for the same period ended in 2018. General and administrative expenses were $19.9 million for the first half of 2019, an increase of $6.1 million, compared to $13.8 million for the same period in 2018.

At June 30, 2019, the company held $410 million in cash, cash equivalents, short-term investments and restricted cash as compared to $440 million that we had at March 31, 2019. During the second quarter, the company used $34 million for operating activities. The company anticipates that the year-end balance of cash, cash equivalents, short-term investments and restricted cash may be between $310 million and $320 million. I will now turn the call back over to the operator for your questions.

Questions & Answers:

Operator

Thank you. [Operator instructions] For your first question, we have Mark Breidenbach from Oppenheimer. Your line is now open.

Mark Breidenbach -- Oppenheimer and Company -- Analyst

Congrats on this very rapid progress, and thanks for taking the questions. Just a first one about timing, relative timing of melanoma versus cervical. These sound like they're both going to be ready for BLA filings toward the end of 2020. If you had to guess which one would come first, could you do that at this point or it's too early to tell?

Maria Fardis -- President and Chief Executive Officer

Hi, Mark, thank you for the question. I don't know if I can necessarily say quite yet. I do want to highlight that we also continue to work with FDA to assure our cervical sample size is in line with their expectations. We think we are fairly close with the numbers.

We want to make sure that we continue that dialogue. I can't tell, which is why sort of said late 2020. And frankly, if they're within a month or two of each other there's a very good chance that we might want to combine them or that the agency asks us to combine them. Somewhere around that late 2020, I think both of them could possibly be filed.

Mark Breidenbach -- Oppenheimer and Company -- Analyst

OK, excellent. And also another timing question with respect to the new manufacturing facility. Obviously construction was started relatively recently. Can you just remind us when you expect it to be fully operational? And have you given any indication on capacity for this facility in terms of number of batches or doses per year it can accommodate?

Maria Fardis -- President and Chief Executive Officer

Yes, we have expected it to be operational in about two years, and our expectation is thousands of patients can be supported through this facility. It is a butterfly design in a sense that half of the facility is expected to be operational, supporting our initial year or two of commercialization. And then subsequent to that, the rest of the facility can also get opened up. So it's capable of increasing capacity as necessary.

Mark Breidenbach -- Oppenheimer and Company -- Analyst

OK, so in the meantime, if you have approved products before, that's operational, but they'd be supported by your agreements with third-party manufacturers?

Maria Fardis -- President and Chief Executive Officer

That's exactly right. So initial manufacturing plan could be done through our existing CMOs while the facility get ready.

Mark Breidenbach -- Oppenheimer and Company -- Analyst

OK. And just one last one from me, if that's OK. Any plans to conduct internally blinded independent reviews of responses, either from Cohort 2 in the melanoma trial or the initial cervical data that you presented at ASCO?

Maria Fardis -- President and Chief Executive Officer

I can answer the second part maybe more easily. Anything going forward now that the agency has agreed the study is pivotal likely will not be done in a public setting. So the cervical data will be read by BIRC but probably will initially be disclosed to FDA before further publication. Cohort 2 BIRC is something that we are working on just to make sure that we have a very clear process with our BIRC.

We have not made a commitment of timing of disclosing that data given that Cohort 2 is just supportive from a FDA perspective. But yes, we are working in that front as well.

Mark Breidenbach -- Oppenheimer and Company -- Analyst

OK, fantastic. Thanks again for taking the questions and congrats on all the progress,

Maria Fardis -- President and Chief Executive Officer

Thank you, Mark.

Operator

Your next question is from Biren Amin from Jefferies. Your line is open.

Biren Amin -- Jefferies -- Analyst

Yes, hi guys. Thanks for taking my questions. Maria, maybe if I could just start on the cervical cancer cohort that you presented at ASCO. How many of the 27 patients that were presented at the meeting will be counted toward the pivotal trial? Because I think previously you said that -- you may have had very few patients who may not have advanced disease.

Maria Fardis -- President and Chief Executive Officer

Almost all would qualify. We have not broken down -- as I've noted when a study is pivotal, we intend to release very little data. Really we should provide that data to FDA first. So we have not broken it down by specific line of therapy.

But almost all of them would qualify with this new patient population definition.

Biren Amin -- Jefferies -- Analyst

Got it. And then just on timelines, I believe you previously commented that the cervical sample size should be in line with FDA. I just want to ask around that because I think in your press release you tightened enrollment. Previously, it was 75 to 100 patients, and now it's just 75 patients.

So I guess what drove this modification?

Maria Fardis -- President and Chief Executive Officer

We continue to dialogue with FDA, and we want to be sure that we have complete alignment. In the meantime, the study itself had 59 in there. So we wanted to be sure that we have enough runway while we continue the discussion with FDA. So that's why we amended it to 75 while we continued the dialogue.

Biren Amin -- Jefferies -- Analyst

OK. And then maybe one more. I noticed that you plan to complete enrollment for the melanoma cohort in Q1 2020. And given you may have overlapping timelines across both indications, should we assume that the cervical cohort would complete enrollment in Q1, 2020?

Maria Fardis -- President and Chief Executive Officer

It's a reason or expectation, Biren. I think it has to do with our completion of the dialogue with the agency, whether they agree with the 75 sample size. But that's the high level assumption that we are pursuing right now. But again, it depends on our completion of the discussion with FDA.

Biren Amin -- Jefferies -- Analyst

Got it, thank you.

Maria Fardis -- President and Chief Executive Officer

Thank you.

Operator

Your next question is from Madhu Kumar from R.W. Baird. Your line is open.

Madhu Kumar -- Robert W. Baird and Company -- Analyst

Yes, thank you for taking my question. So one thing we've been kind of thinking about a lot is how physicians consider the use of IL-2 as part of the TIL administration procedure. And when you've talked to physicians in your market research, what has been the kind of feedback on the use of IL-2? And to what degree do you think kind of improving the perspective of treating oncologist will occur through education versus technologies, say newer methods that don't rely upon kind of the use of high-dose IL-2 even if it's at a different dosing duration than the kind of standard approved usage?

Maria Fardis -- President and Chief Executive Officer

Thank you, Madhu. Maybe a couple of points before sort of talking about the hospital experience. The median number of doses for both melanoma and cervical, one was 5.5 and one was 6. So administration of IL-2 didn't seem to be an issue both for the patients tolerance perspective, as well as the hospital infrastructure.

It's important that we note that we are in hospital setting for just about all of our clinical trials sites are hospitals. Most of these sites have already been using IL-2. And in fact, many more sites have been using IL-2 in the past five years. The footprint of IL-2 has been at 100 and 150 or so different sites as late as about five years ago.

So there's a lot of trained staff at most of the hospitals that have administered IL-2, and they are comfortable with it. So we have not really run into an issue where we wanted to activate a site and they had no staff that had been trained on IL-2. We also definitely help with any refreshments in terms of training to administration of IL-2 as well. So that hasn't really come up as a show stopper issue for us.

It seems that most of the hospitals that we are in have the trained staff to support that administration.

Madhu Kumar -- Robert W. Baird and Company -- Analyst

OK, great. And then my other question is are there any expectations for data in the next six to 12 months that would be reasonable? I mean, obviously you can't speak hard and fast but would there be any more data from anything kind of ongoing clinical programs over the next year or so?

Maria Fardis -- President and Chief Executive Officer

Yes. We do have other studies beside the two pivotal programs. We certainly could have data on Cohort 2 if there's any new information to be shared. Other indications are all ongoing.

So we have not excluded a possibility of trying to put some data out, particularly if the window was more like the 12 months timeframe. But we haven't committed to anything. I guess that's how to look at it.

Madhu Kumar -- Robert W. Baird and Company -- Analyst

OK, to follow up on that last point, you said you'd have more presentation of Cohort 2 melanoma data if there's new information. What would you define as new information from that cohort?

Maria Fardis -- President and Chief Executive Officer

I can define at least two different directions is we have, for example, a DOR that is reached, if we have specific biomarkers that may be appearing upon further investigation or thinking about, for example, even in the case of cervical, the clonality of distribution of clonality of cervical. All of those are interesting exciting things that we still continue looking at. There's a combination of how much data may be coming, as well as what venues are available that may be interested in hearing about them. I know the investor community is very interested in the details of the data.

Academic institutions are more interested in putting brand new sort of directions for research out in various conferences. So conferences are receptive to something that may be more different than just ORR, DOR that we have published before. So there needs to be a venue where we feel it's appropriate to disclose the data. But there is definite ongoing investigation in Cohort 2, as well as our other indications, that we think are exciting and we learn something new about them every day.

We could put that information out.

Madhu Kumar -- Robert W. Baird and Company -- Analyst

OK, to be a little cheeky, would the absence of disclosures from Cohort 2 then support the opposite corollary that the DOR has not been reached, the median DOR has not been reached?

Maria Fardis -- President and Chief Executive Officer

It could also vis-a-vis might have considered a conference, and the conference did not think just adding a DOR was adequate enough to get into that conference. So I wouldn't read too much into it.

Madhu Kumar -- Robert W. Baird and Company -- Analyst

OK, great. Thanks very much.

Maria Fardis -- President and Chief Executive Officer

Sure.

Operator

Your next question is from Joe Catanzaro of Piper Jaffray. Your line is open.

Joe Catanzaro -- Piper Jaffray -- Analyst

Hey, thanks for taking the questions. Maybe I'll follow up and just ask the question a little differently and thinking more about near-term data disclosure. So I believe today is actually the deadline for SIPC regular abstract submission. Have you guys submitted anything to SIPC?

Maria Fardis -- President and Chief Executive Officer

I usually don't comment on what we have submitted or we intended to submit until the titles or the abstract itself is released. Sorry, Joe, I prefer that we know what we can talk to. If that's OK, we'll wait until the titles come out.

Joe Catanzaro -- Piper Jaffray -- Analyst

Fair enough. Just thought I'd ask. My next question, so I believe you had mentioned maybe later last year the idea of taking an interim look at Cohort 4 melanoma and whether the FDA would agree to that. Was that ever built into Cohort 4? And then along those lines, is there similar opportunity in cervical to take an interim look if you believe your 95% confidence intervals will exceed that lower down hurdle?

Maria Fardis -- President and Chief Executive Officer

Mm-hmm. Yes, we just think about it for a moment in time. I think that as cervical is becoming potentially a component of this package, we prefer to transfer all of them together, not to have multiple cuts on the data. So today's preference for me would be to read both studies, both cohorts of the studies at the same time and try and see if we can provide FDA with the totality of the data.

That would be a more preferred path for us.

Joe Catanzaro -- Piper Jaffray -- Analyst

OK, got it. And then maybe just one more quick one here. I'm wondering if you've noticed any pick up of enrollment into your cervical trial since the ASCO data disclosure?

Maria Fardis -- President and Chief Executive Officer

In operations of a study, typically we see ways of patients coming and going. So we've definitely seen increased enthusiasm. I think one of the points that Tim made in our increase spend is reflective of our increase in R&D. There has generally been a lot more enthusiasm recently in the entire TIL program.

That I can say.

Joe Catanzaro -- Piper Jaffray -- Analyst

OK, great. And maybe I'll just squeeze in one more here along the same lines, just in regards to the head and neck trial. I know you guys had sort of struggled with enrollment there and I know it's still the early days of the recent Keytruda label expansion in the front line setting, so the window is short. But I'm just wondering if you have any comments around what you're seeing in head and neck right now.

Maria Fardis -- President and Chief Executive Officer

Yes, a very good observation. I agree that I believe the landscape of head and neck is changing. And hopefully, for the better for the patient. Ideally the patients would have seen chemo immunotherapy in the front line and hopefully then the patients would come into study as opposed to third or fourth line where the patients are quite late line at that point.

So we are beginning to see that trend, although it is, as you noted, it is early in that landscape shift in a meaningful way. But yes, we are beginning to see that pattern.

Joe Catanzaro -- Piper Jaffray -- Analyst

OK, great, thanks for taking my questions.

Maria Fardis -- President and Chief Executive Officer

Thank you, Joe.

Operator

Your next question is from Bula Lushic [Sp] from Shardon [Sp]. Your line is open.

Unknown speaker

Congrats again on the progress and thank you for taking my question. So kind of touching on the same theme with the potential BLA filing time frames for melanoma and cervical in place. Could you speak a bit to the kinds of preparation that you're making for the filing and to what extent there's overlap for the two programs? And then I have a follow-up after.

Maria Fardis -- President and Chief Executive Officer

Thank you, Bula, for your question. It's a little hard to hear you, but I think I understood that you are asking what kind of preparation the organization is going through in anticipation for filing.

Unknown speaker

Yes.

Maria Fardis -- President and Chief Executive Officer

Thank you. There's quite a bit that an organization that may be thinking about a filing next year has to go through, both from an infrastructure perspective, short term and long term, both procedurally, as well as from a growth perspective. So you can imagine that from a procedural perspective, various documents need to be finalized, need to be put in place. A lot of different hiring needs to be had, including the team members in commercial, medical affairs being expanded.

Market access, market research is undertaken. So a significant amount of activities are undertaken in anticipation of both filing, as well as a potential commercialization. And we are certainly on track for initiation of many of those works streams.

Unknown speaker

Great. And then now that we have a sense that the regulatory plans in the U.S., you've mentioned that kind of Europe is on the horizon. Is there any further visibility in terms of next steps toward putting together a path in Europe? And what are some of the consideration that might be different there versus the U.S. for the two programs and whether you plan to kind of advance them together or separately?

Maria Fardis -- President and Chief Executive Officer

Definitely. So we have been thinking about engaging the EMA in a more centralized procedure, but we want to make sure that we wrap up all of our FDA discussion around cervical sample size agreement around the protocol before we engage EMA. It's always easier when we have at least a set of agreement in one health authority before we go to the second health authority. It's very much on our horizon, and we are very excited about the fact that we have a fairly broad footprint in our clinical program in Europe.

But for a centralized procedure, we think that's likely more toward later part of this year and earlier part of 2020.

Unknown speaker

Great. Thanks again on the progress and [Inaudible].

Maria Fardis -- President and Chief Executive Officer

Thank you for your questions.

Operator

Your next question is from Boris Peaker from Cowen. Your line is open.

Boris Peaker -- Cowen and Company -- Analyst

Great. So first question I want is on the cervical indication. I'm just curious, what specific patient enrollment criteria did the FDA want to see in the pivotal study that ended up excluding some of the patients that we saw at ASCO?

Maria Fardis -- President and Chief Executive Officer

Hi, Boris. Sure. Our initial enrollment criteria was patients who have received one prior systemic therapy. And while bulk of these patients are in the metastatic setting, not everybody necessarily has seen a systemic therapy in a metastatic setting.

So the definition was a little tighter after the discussion with FDA to assure that they have seen that one prior systemic therapy in the metastatic setting. That was their clarity.

Boris Peaker -- Cowen and Company -- Analyst

And what's a non-systemic therapy? It just means just localized surgery without adjuvant treatment? Is that what that is?

Maria Fardis -- President and Chief Executive Officer

A localized therapy can be applied in a curative setting for example. It could have been a surgery combined with radiotherapy for example. Or it could be surgery along with a systemic therapy. So the definition here is stay in the metastatic setting and not in the curative setting.

Boris Peaker -- Cowen and Company -- Analyst

Gotcha. My next question is on the manufacturing facility Once it becomes operational, and you've outlined a timeline of about two years, would Lonza will still be involved in any way or is that when your Lonza relationship ends and you kind of break off on your own for manufacturing?

Maria Fardis -- President and Chief Executive Officer

Thank you for that. So Lonza is our manufacturer in EU. So if I may rephrase your question, I presume you're asking about WuXi?

Boris Peaker -- Cowen and Company -- Analyst

Yes, WuXi, I forgot. That's for the U.S. That's right.

Maria Fardis -- President and Chief Executive Officer

Sure. We intend to continue the relationship with WuXi. We find that it's particularly as helpful for our tech transfer, process development and our clinical program. So as of now, there is no reason that I see for us to discontinue that relationship.

They will cover our initial commercial landscape, and I would like them to stay engaged with Iovance for their commercialization landscape as well. I don't see this program ending just because we are commercial. We will always have a development program behind it.

Boris Peaker -- Cowen and Company -- Analyst

Great, thank you for taking my questions.

Maria Fardis -- President and Chief Executive Officer

Thank you, Boris.

Operator

As we have no more questions, we would now like to return to Maria Fardis for closing remarks.

Maria Fardis -- President and Chief Executive Officer

Thank you, operator. We are glad to have this opportunity to reflect on our progress. We would like to extend our sincere appreciation for the many individuals who support our work, including our shareholders, dedicated and talented employees, patients, clinical investigators and their ongoing studies and researchers at our partners institutions already working with us to refine the application of TIL therapy. And thank you for all of you joining us on this call today.

Operator?

Operator

[Operator signoff]

Duration: 35 minutes

Call participants:

Tim Morris -- Chief Financial Officer

Maria Fardis -- President and Chief Executive Officer

Mark Breidenbach -- Oppenheimer and Company -- Analyst

Biren Amin -- Jefferies -- Analyst

Madhu Kumar -- Robert W. Baird and Company -- Analyst

Joe Catanzaro -- Piper Jaffray -- Analyst

Unknown speaker

Boris Peaker -- Cowen and Company -- Analyst

More IOVA analysis

All earnings call transcripts

This article is a transcript of this conference call produced for The Motley Fool. While we strive for our Foolish Best, there may be errors, omissions, or inaccuracies in this transcript. As with all our articles, The Motley Fool does not assume any responsibility for your use of this content, and we strongly encourage you to do your own research, including listening to the call yourself and reading the company's SEC filings. Please see our Terms and Conditions for additional details, including our Obligatory Capitalized Disclaimers of Liability.

Motley Fool Transcribing has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

This article was originally published on Fool.com