Alirio Melendez, who has already had 12 papers retracted from various journals and been found guilty of scientific misconduct by a former employer, has had a Science paper retracted.
Here’s the notice (which is behind a paywall): Continue reading Melendez Science paper retracted, making 13
University of Glasgow professor Foo Yew “Eddy” Liew, a Fellow of the Royal Society, has retracted a paper in Cellular Immunology because it duplicated one of his earlier papers in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS).
Here’s the notice for “Expression and function of Toll-like receptor on T cells:”
Continue reading Leading immunologist retracts paper that duplicated 2004 PNAS study
We’ve often found that when some authors refuse to sign retraction notices, there’s a much bigger story than terse notices let on. And a retraction in this week’s Nature of a 19-year-old paper is a shining example of that.
Here’s the brief notice for “Oligosaccharide ligands for NKR-P1 protein activate NK cells and cytotoxicity,” a 1994 paper by researchers from the UK and the Czech Republic that had already been subject to a 1996 correction: Continue reading Retraction of 19-year-old Nature paper reveals hidden cameras, lab break-in, evidence tampering
Last month, Ivan met David Vaux at the 3rd World Conference on Research Integrity in Montreal. David mentioned a retraction he published in Nature, and we thought it would be a great guest post on what it’s like to retract one of your own papers in an attempt to clean up the literature.
In September 1995 Nature asked me to review a manuscript by Bellgrau and co-workers, which subsequently appeared. I was very excited by this paper, as it showed that expression of CD95L on Sertoli cells in allogeneic mismatched testes tissue transplanted under the kidney capsule was able to induce apoptosis of invading cytotoxic T cells, thereby preventing rejection. As I wrote in a News and Views piece, the implications of these findings were enormous – grafts engineered to express CD95L would be able to prevent rejection without generalized immunosuppression.
In fact, I was so taken by these findings that we started generation of transgenic mice that expressed CD95L on their islet beta cells to see if it would allow islet cell grafts to avoid rejection and provide a cure for diabetes in mismatched recipients.
Little did we know that instead of providing an answer to transplant rejection, these experiments would teach us a great deal about editorial practices and the difficulty of correcting errors once they appear in the literature. Continue reading Why I retracted my Nature paper: A guest post from David Vaux about correcting the scientific record
In what could be a significant blow to a major pharmaceutical company, Nature Medicine is reportedly set to retract a 2010 article by a group of researchers affiliated with a Chinese arm of the drug giant GlaxoSmithKline.
We’re not the first to report the news — you can read coverage of it on In the Pipeline and Pharmalot, for starters — which includes the revelation that Glaxo has fired Jingwu Zang, a co-author of the suspect paper and former senior vice president and head of research and development at the Shanghai facility: in other words, a big fish. (Big enough to have a profile in, well, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.)
Pharmalot has quoted a Glaxo spokeswoman: Continue reading Glaxo asks Nature Medicine to retract paper by fired company scientist
Apologies, mea culpas, regrets. Kids, let this be a warning to you: Don’t plagiarize. You will get caught, and you’ll have to come clean.
Just ask a group of Spanish researchers who published a 2011 paper in Proteome Science, then lost it this past April because they’d stolen text and a figure from previously published work — some, but not all of it, their own.
The retraction notice for “Clinical and technical phosphoproteomic research” tells the story: Continue reading A regretful retraction for plagiarism and duplication in Proteome Science
A paper by a crystallographer fired from his university for misconduct has been partially retracted.
Last year, we covered the case of Robert Schwarzenbacher, formerly of Salzburg University. Schwarzenbacher had provided the crystallographic data for a paper in the Journal of Immunology, but those results raised questions with another crystallographer and prompted an investigation by the university. Schwarzenbacher admitted he’d committed misconduct, although he recanted at one point, and was eventually fired.
Now, the authors have retracted the crystallographic data from the Journal of Immunology paper. Here’s the partial retraction, which is listed as a correction:
Continue reading A partial retraction appears for former Salzburg crystallographer who admitted misconduct
The editor of Clinical Medicine Insights: Oncology has issued an Expression of Concern over a 2008 paper by a group of authors in China after identifying “flaws” in one of the figures.
The article, “Exvivo experiments of human ovarian cancer ascites-derived exosomes presented by dendritic cells derived from umbilical cord blood for immunotherapy treatment,” purported to show that:
tumor-specific antigens present on exosomes can be presented by DCs [dendritic cells] derived from unrelated umbilical cord blood to induce tumor specific cytotoxicity and this may represent as a novel immunotherapy for ovarian cancer.
But according to William C. S. Cho, editor of the journal, there’s reason to doubt the conclusions. As the notice explains:
Continue reading Dodgy figure in cord blood paper prompts Expression of Concern in oncology journal
A group of researchers at Bristol-Myers Squibb has had a paper retracted for reasons we can’t quite figure out.
All the notice for “Simultaneous expression of antibody light and heavy chains in Pichia pastoris: improving retransformation outcome by linearizing vector at a different site,” published in Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology, says is: Continue reading Paper by Bristol-Myers Squibb researchers retracted for “unsolved legal reasons”
Rui Curi — the Brazilian scientist who threatened to sue the now-shuttered Science-Fraud.org site for criticizing his work — has rung up his second retraction, this one for a paper that he corrected earlier this year.
Here’s the Journal of Endocrinology notice, whose headers and language are a bit confusing, understandably, because it is retracting two things, a correction and the original paper: Continue reading Streisand Effect meets tough editors as journal retracts already-corrected paper by Rui Curi