Anil Potti‘s retraction count is now eight with the withdrawal of a 2008 study in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA).
Here’s the notice, which appeared online in JAMA sometime yesterday:
We would like to retract the article entitled “Gene Expression Signatures, Clinicopathological Features, and Individualized Therapy in Breast Cancer,” which was published in the April 2, 2008, issue of JAMA.1 A component of this article reported the use of chemotherapy sensitivity predictions based on an approach described by Potti et al in Nature Medicine in 2006. The Nature Medicine article was recently retracted due to an inability to reproduce the results with the chemotherapy signatures.2 Because a significant component of this JAMA article was based on the use of chemotherapy signatures reported in the Nature Medicine paper, we have decided to retract the JAMA article. We apologize for any negative impact on scientific research or clinical care caused by the publication of our article in JAMA.
The Nature Medicine study was retracted a year ago today. The JAMA study has been cited 64 times, according to Thomson Scientific’s Web of Knowledge. Thirteen of those citations were recorded since January of last year, when we first asked JAMA whether they were planning to retract the study.
We also reported that Potti failed to disclose corporate ties when he originally submitted the paper. The retraction would seem to make any correction for that omission moot.
Potti and his colleagues have another paper in JAMA, from 2010, “Age- and Sex-Specific Genomic Profiles in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.” No word on the fate of that one yet.
A Duke official said in August that he expected about a third of Potti’s approximately 40 papers to be completely retracted, and another third to have “a portion retracted with other components remaining intact.”
Meanwhile, Potti continues to publish.
Update, 2 p.m. Eastern, 1/9/11: Read Ivan’s coverage of this story, including comment from M.D. Anderson’s Keith Baggerly and the American Cancer Society’s Otis Brawley, for Reuters.