Another thing to consider is what actually is an "FTO-Related...

Another thing to consider is what actually is an "FTO-Related Phase 3 Clinical Trial".

If Bisantrene's primary MoA is indeed FTO inhibition, and this occurs at much lower doses than any other effects (e.g. cardio-protection or Chemotherapy-like effects) then wouldn't any and all trials using Bisantrene (including all historical trials and current Sheba trials) by definition be "FTO-related", as there would be no way of dosing Bisantrene so that it is not acting as an FTO inhibitor. Unless you were to dose it so low as to be completely ineffective.

Would this imply that any usage of Bisantrene without license from CoH is infringing on CoH's patent? Would CoH therefore be entitled to a royalty from any usage of Bisantrene? Without an agreement, could CoH prevent Race using Bisantrene (even though it's Race's IP) because they figured out how it works (but didn't actually prove it in humans as Race still has to do that), or even legitimately claim it infringes on their patent?

Can you validly patent a mechanism which has been happening for the last 40 years? CoH have identified what the mechanism is, but does that mean it's a valid invention of theirs if it's been happening (though perhaps not fully understood) since Bisantrene was first invented? Where is the novelty?

Perhaps this can't all be argued until Race can verify the MoA with in-human data.

Sounds like fun for some lawyers at a minimum.