Company: ARTL
Filing Date: 2025-03-03
Form Type: 10-K
Source: 0001640334-25-000335
Chunk: 245

Company: ARTELO BIOSCIENCES, INC.
Filing Date: 2025-03-03
Form: 10-K
Item: Item 1A
Chunk 245
---
 requirements and guidance may occur, and the Company may need to amend clinical trial protocols or our development plan to reflect these changes. Amendments may require resubmitting clinical trial protocols to the FDA or other similar authorities in other jurisdictions and institutional review boards (“IRBs”) for re-examination, which may impact the costs, timing or successful completion of our clinical trials. If the Company experiences delays in completion of, or if the Company terminates any planned clinical trials, the commercial prospects for product candidates may be harmed, and the ability to generate product revenues will be delayed. In addition, many of the factors that cause, or lead to, a delay in the commencement or completion of clinical trials may also ultimately lead to the denial of regulatory approval of product candidates. Further, changes in regulatory requirements and policies can impact our clinical trials, including due to public health concerns, such as the COVID-19 pandemic. For example, stresses on healthcare systems and our clinical trial sites may have a material impact on our ability to recruit participants for our clinical trials and the Company may not be able to commence or complete our clinical trials as currently planned. The Company may also be required to significantly modify our study protocol, policies and procedures in order to address or accommodate patients and study site needs. Such changes can include modification to protocol inclusion and exclusion criteria, extending the time for patient follow up visits, using telemedicine, phone interviews and other technology to monitor patient safety, all of which will need to be approved by applicable IRBs, ethics committees, and regulatory authorities. Recently, the U.S. Supreme Court overruled the Chevron doctrine, which gives deference to regulatory agencies’ statutory interpretations in litigation against federal government agencies, such as the FDA, where the law is ambiguous. This landmark Supreme Court decision may invite more companies and other stakeholders to bring lawsuits against the FDA to challenge longstanding decisions and policies of the FDA, including FDA’s statutory interpretations of market exclusivities and the “substantial evidence” requirements for drug approvals, which could undermine the FDA’s authority, lead to uncertainties in the industry, and disrupt the FDA’s normal operations, any of which could delay the FDA’s review of our regulatory submissions. We cannot predict the full impact of this decision, future judicial challenges brought against the FDA, or the nature or extent of government regulation that may arise from future legislation or administrative action.

Geopolitical tensions, including the war in Ukraine and the Israel-Hamas war or other regional conflicts may disrupt investment in our business, supply chains carrying required materials and the movement of people globally.