Exclusive: King’s College London finds “poor research practices” but no misconduct in two recent cases

King’s College London (KCL) found evidence of poor research practices by three of its faculty, but “no intention to deceive” and no misconduct, according to documents obtained by Retraction Watch.

One case involves work by cancer biologists Farzin Farzaneh and Ghulam Mufti, while the other involves work by Mahvash Tavassoli, also a cancer researcher. Both involve problems with images and were brought to the attention of KCL in January of this year by pseudonymous whistleblower Claire Francis.

In the Farzaneh and Mufti case, writes Tim Newton, KCL’s dean of research governance, ethics and integrity in an October 31 letter:

The Panel found that all but three allegations brought to light were of substance and that, in each case, the respondents had no intention to deceive and the allegation was of a nature that can be remedied. 

In these instances, the Panel determined that there is clear evidence of poor practice in research, but that the findings did not constitute research misconduct. The Panel concluded therefore, in relation to these allegations, no further action should be taken under the Procedure. 

Three of the allegations referred to the College were deemed to be unfounded, as there was insufficient evidence to support them. 

The Panel has requested that Professors Farzaneh and Mufti provide notices of correction, publish errata, and/or provide amended figures to the following scientific journals: Molecular Therapy, Blood, Haematologica, Molecular and Cellular Biology, and Molecular Cancer Research.

Farzaneh is listed as an investigator on current grants worth £5 million and has been an investigator on grants worth tens of millions of pounds over the past few decades.

Mufti has been an investigator on grants worth nearly £8 million since 2010, and in 2017 was awarded an Order of the British Empire (OBE) “for services to haematological medicine.”

An ‘appropriate’ outcome, says whistleblower

In the Tavassoli case, writes KCL senior vice president for operations Ian Tebbett in a June 26 letter:

The panel found that there was substance to each allegation but, on the part of the respondent, there was no intention to deceive. Therefore, the panel concluded that in each instance its findings constituted poor research practice short of misconduct. No further action will be taken. The matter will now be referred to the Faculty to take forward the Panel’s recommendations for additional training. 

The Panel noted that the respondent took appropriate steps once alerted to the allegations, by informing co-authors (where relevant) and issuing a notice of correction to the journal Cell Cycle. I have taken the additional step of informing the institution of the last author on the Journal of Virology paper. 

A correction appeared in Cell Cycle on March 19. Francis, the whistleblower, told Retraction Watch he felt the outcome of the case was “appropriate.”

Neither Farzaneh, Mufti, nor Tavassoli have responded to requests for comment from Retraction Watch.

Last month, we reported on an investigation by KCL into the work of controversial psychologist Hans Eysenck.

Like Retraction Watch? You can make a tax-deductible contribution to support our work, follow us on Twitter, like us on Facebook, add us to your RSS reader, or subscribe to our daily digest. If you find a retraction that’s not in our database, you can let us know here. For comments or feedback, email us at [email protected].

10 thoughts on “Exclusive: King’s College London finds “poor research practices” but no misconduct in two recent cases”

  1. J Biol Chem. 2001 Apr 13;276(15):12068-75. Epub 2001 Jan 11.
    Selective cleavage of BLM, the bloom syndrome protein, during apoptotic cell death.
    http://www.jbc.org/content/276/15/12068.long
    Oliver Bischof‡§,¶‖, Sanjeev Galande‡§, Farzin Farzaneh¶, Terumi Kohwi-Shigematsu‡ and Judith Campisi‡**
    -Author Affiliations

    From the ‡Life Sciences Division, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley California 94720 and the ¶Department of Molecular Medicine, The Rayne Institute, Guy’s, Kuig’s and St. Thomas’ School of Medicine, King’s College, London SE5 9NU, United Kingdom

    Figure 5E. Much more similar after horizontal flip than you would expect.

    See: https://imgur.com/VBMd9mm

  2. Data in Toxicol Lett. 2009 Dec 15;191(2-3):118-22 looks very like data in J Leukoc Biol. 2005 Aug;78(2):503-14, yet experiments different.

    See: https://imgur.com/GDsKobQ

    Toxicol Lett. 2009 Dec 15;191(2-3):118-22. doi: 10.1016/j.toxlet.2009.08.012. Epub 2009 Aug 19.
    RACK-1 overexpression protects against goniothalamin-induced cell death.
    Inayat-Hussain SH1, Wong LT, Chan KM, Rajab NF, Din LB, Harun R, Kizilors A, Saxena N, Mourtada-Maarabouni M, Farzaneh F, Williams GT.
    Author information
    1
    Toxicology and Biocompatibility Laboratory, Faculty of Allied Health Sciences, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia.

    J Leukoc Biol. 2005 Aug;78(2):503-14. Epub 2005 May 3.
    Functional expression cloning reveals a central role for the receptor for activated protein kinase C 1 (RACK1) in T cell apoptosis.
    Mourtada-Maarabouni M1, Kirkham L, Farzaneh F, Williams GT.
    Author information
    1
    School of Life Sciences, Keele University, Keele, ST5 5BG, UK.

  3. Cellular Signalling Volume 27, Issue 3, March 2015, Pages 621-629
    Rania Hallaq a Floriana Volpicelli b Inmaculada Cuchillo-Ibanez a1 ClaudieHooper a Keiko Mizuno a Dafe Uwanogho a Mirsada Causevic a Ayodeji Asuni a Alvina To a Salvador Soriano c
    K. Peter Giese a Simon Lovestone d Richard Killick a

    https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S089865681400388X?via%3Dihub

    Problematic data figure 3d.
    See: https://pubpeer.com/publications/A8F2B88889CB2BC4D2DCD9B0078EF9

  4. J Neurosci. 2001 Jul 15;21(14):4987-95.
    Dishevelled regulates the metabolism of amyloid precursor protein via protein kinase C/mitogen-activated protein kinase and c-Jun terminal kinase.
    Mudher A1, Chapman S, Richardson J, Asuni A, Gibb G, Pollard C, Killick R, Iqbal T, Raymond L, Varndell I, Sheppard P, Makoff A, Gower E, Soden PE, Lewis P, Murphy M, Golde TE, Rupniak HT, Anderton BH, Lovestone S.
    Author information
    1
    Departments of Neuroscience and Psychiatry, Institute of Psychiatry, King’s College London, London SE5 8AF, United Kingdom.

    Figure 5B. Much more similar than you would expect.
    https://imgur.com/NHcbVRo

  5. PLoS One. 2018 May 22;13(5):e0196528. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0196528. eCollection 2018.
    TDP-43 causes neurotoxicity and cytoskeletal dysfunction in primary cortical neurons
    Pranetha Baskaran 1, Christopher Shaw 2, Sarah Guthrie 1

    Affiliations
    1Department of Developmental Neurobiology, King’s College, Guy’s Campus, London, United Kingdom.
    2Maurice Wohl Clinical Neuroscience Institute, King’s College, London, United Kingdom.

    https://pubpeer.com/publications/043CD581FC7EE5FCB7B67E52F8E3A9

    Figure 4B.
    https://imgur.com/PCQZXwc

    1. 2021 retraction for:

      PLoS One. 2018 May 22;13(5):e0196528. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0196528. eCollection 2018.

      2021 retraction notice.
      https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0252752

      Following the publication of this article [1], concerns were raised regarding the results presented in Fig 4. Specifically,

      In Fig 4A-D, there are cells within each panel that are highly similar to one another. In many cases, the background around the similar cells appears discontinuous with neighbouring background such that there appear to be rectangles of differently shaded background around these cells. Underlying data provided by the authors confirm that additional cell images were pasted into all four figure panels, affecting the number of bright and dark cells shown. Furthermore, the underlying data provided for Fig 4C did not match the panel presented in the published figure, raising further concerns about the validity of the data reported in this panel.
      The number of TUNEL-positive cells in the underlying images provided by the authors do not appear to reflect the quantitative trend reported in the 72-h histogram (Fig 4E) for panels B, C, and D. Furthermore, the underlying data provided to support this figure do not indicate the counted TUNEL-positive cells were normalised to total cell numbers, as was reported in the Methods section.
      The authors clarified that the quantification of the Fig 4 results took place under the microscope and that only representative images were saved. The authors stated that the data underlying the other results reported in this article are still available.

      This issue was reviewed by the Research Integrity Office and Dean for Research Governance, Ethics and Integrity at Kings College London. The institution did not find evidence of intent to deceive but noted some issues around lack of awareness of good practice standards.

      Overall, the data and comments provided did not fully resolve the above concerns nor provide adequate assurance as to the reliability of the results reported in Fig 4. In light of these issues, the PLOS ONE Editors retract this article.

      PB agreed with the retraction and apologises for the issues with the published article. CS and SG either did not respond directly or could not be reached.

      Reference
      1.Baskaran P, Shaw C, Guthrie S (2018) TDP-43 causes neurotoxicity and cytoskeletal dysfunction in primary cortical neurons. PLoS ONE 13(5): e0196528. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0196528 pmid:29787572

  6. 2020 retraction for Farzin Farzaneh.
    https://www.jbc.org/content/276/15/12068.long
    Selective Cleavage of BLM, the Bloom Syndrome Protein, during Apoptotic Cell Death*
    Oliver Bischof‡§,¶‖, Sanjeev Galande‡§, Farzin Farzaneh¶, Terumi Kohwi-Shigematsu‡ and Judith Campisi‡**
    -Author Affiliations

    From the ‡Life Sciences Division, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley California 94720 and the ¶Department of Molecular Medicine, The Rayne Institute, Guy’s, Kuig’s and St. Thomas’ School of Medicine, King’s College, London SE5 9NU, United Kingdom.

    2020 retraction.
    https://www.jbc.org/content/295/49/16905
    VOLUME 276 (2001) PAGES 12068–12075

    This article has been withdrawn by the authors except Dr. Kohwi-Shigematsu, who could not be reached. Fig. 3B has a duplication of the top band in lanes 1 and 3. Fig. 5D has a duplication between the top bands and a horizontal flip of the bottom bands. Fig. 5E likewise has a duplication of the top bands excluding the probe lanes and a horizontal flip of the bottom bands. Fig. 6A has smaller microscopy images pasted on the background of larger microscopy images.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.