Company: RCUS
Filing Date: 2025-08-06
Form Type: 10-Q
Source: 0001724521-25-000101
Chunk: 209

Company: Arcus Biosciences, Inc.
Filing Date: 2025-08-06
Form: 10-Q
Item: Part I, Item 1
Chunk 209
---
 six months ended June 30, 2025 and 2024.

Note 5. Revenues 

The following table summarizes our revenues by collaboration, category of revenue, and the method of recognition (in millions):Three Months Ended June 30,Six Months Ended June 30,Over timePoint in time2025202420252024Gilead collaboration      License and R&D services* $154 $27 $177 $160 Access rights* 6 9 11 17 Taiho collaboration      Other*— 3 — 7 Total revenues  $160 $39 $188 $184 Total revenues from collaborations$152 $28 $172 $163 Total revenues from a customer$8 $11 $16 $21 Revenues from Gilead accounted for 100% and 92% of Total revenues for the three months ended June 30, 2025 and 2024, respectively and 100% and 96% of Total revenues for the six months ended June 30, 2025 and 2024, respectively.

11

The following table summarizes the revenue recognized as a result of changes in the deferred revenue balance (in millions):Three Months Ended June 30,Six Months Ended June 30,2025202420252024Revenue recognized from amounts in deferred revenue at the beginning of the period$160 $39 $188 $180 We had $131 million and $319 million of deferred revenue remaining on our Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets at June 30, 2025 and December 31, 2024, respectively, allocated between current and noncurrent based on the expected timing of future recognition.Revenue from the Gilead CollaborationIn the first quarter 2025, we decided to pause future development of etrumadenant. In June 2025, Gilead terminated its rights to etrumadenant (the adenosine receptor antagonist program). We determined that this was a significant reduction in the scope of the arrangement, which met the accounting definition of a contract modification. As a result, we accounted for this as both a modification of the existing contract and the creation of a new contract. Under the applicable accounting rules for such contract modifications, we did not adjust the accounting for completed performance obligations that were distinct from the modified goods or services. Accordingly, we allocated the updated transaction price of $256 million, which was comprised of