Not at all.I've kept a pretty close eye on our patent position...

Not at all.

I've kept a pretty close eye on our patent position since City of Hope attempted to patent the treatment of FTO-mediated cancer (with CS1/Bisantrene), which was rejected partly due to RAC's own patent.

https://patentscope.wipo.int/search/docs2/pct/WO2021016464/pdf/Hhwm8V8F_gwgnw8E0qGBLEl1urYhNC5bvlbW5ohS7Mw

"How do we get a strong level of assurance that each has got adequate incremental protection, if there is a thing."

See above

"What you gave in response is appreciated and just highlights to me that each and every different use of Bis will require separate lodgements."

This really depends on the MOAs. It's quite possible other drugs already target the same pathway, perhaps better, perhaps worse. Targeted FTO inhibition is already under patent (although this was after RAC repatented Bis - which should mitigate any precedence concern), and was also cited in the City of Hope's rejection correspondence.

https://patentscope.wipo.int/search/en/detail.jsf?docId=EP280244771&_cid=P22-M01M9K-06556-1

IMO, the RC220 patent will be our most valuable. Competition is inevitable and that's why FICBIC is so important.