Pillar 1 - FTO (new thread), page-2474

The difference with IMU and CF-33 is that with that deal IMU are licensing and trying to commercialise a COH invention.

Bisantrene was not invented by COH, and RAC already own all rights to it.

It would appear that COH still have an interest in pursuing and further advancing FTO into the clinic, and it would seem that they haven't been able to find a better way of doing so than by using Bisantrene, or I expect they would have done it already and wouldn't be interested in talking to us.

One would hope that this puts RAC somewhat more in the "driver's seat" than IMU are when it comes to the relationship with COH.

It isn't all a once-way street though, as obviously though RAC also stands to benefit from this relationship. Not only having doctors and scientists who understand the potential of FTO and are keen to work on advancing the science and clinical status of this treatment, but who are also able to direct their patients into FTO-related trials where appropriate.