At issue was a 2011 paper on a biomarker for liver cancer by a group of Turkish authors who plagiarized from the work of others.
Here’s the notice for the article, titled “Diagnostic and Prognostic Validity of Golgi Protein 73 in Hepatocellular Carcinoma“:
We regret to inform you that the criticism raised by the Editorial Board is correct concerning the similarity between some parts of the texts present in our article published in Digestion [2011; 83: 83–88], and the papers in the Journal of Hepatology [2005; 43: 1007–1012] and in Hepatology [2009; 49: 1421–1423], although the research data are completely independent.
We apologize for this unfortunate error, which was established during the writing process of the manuscript by the author Harun Erdal. Although the final version of the submitted paper had been examined by all authors, they failed to recognize the ‘transferred parts’ of the papers in the Journal of Hepatology [2005; 43: 1007–1012] and in Hepatology [2009; 49: 1421–1423]. Thus, for the sake of scientific clarity and based on the above-mentioned facts, we prefer to retract our paper Diagnostic and Prognostic Validity of Golgi Protein 73 in Hepatocellular Carcinoma. Digestion 2011; 83: 83–88 (DOI:10.1159/000320379).
The notice lists all the authors.
The plagiarized paper from the Journal of Hepatology was this one: “GP73, a resident Golgi glycoprotein, is a novel serum marker for hepatocellular carcinoma;” the one from Hepatology was an editorial: “Golgi protein 73 as a biomarker of hepatocellular cancer: Development of a quantitative serum assay and expression studies in hepatic and extrahepatic malignancies.”