Category: clinical study retractions

Cancer biology group notches sixth retraction, and earns an Expression of Concern

bjcA group at the University of Texas Southwestern that retracted five papers last year has retracted one more, and has had a paper subjected to an Expression of Concern at the request of the school’s dean.

Here’s the retraction notice for “DNA methylation-associated inactivation of TGFβ-related genes, DRM/Gremlin, RUNX3, and HPP1 in human cancers,” originally published in the British Journal of Cancer and cited 51 times, according to Thomson Scientific’s Web of Knowledge:
Continue reading Cancer biology group notches sixth retraction, and earns an Expression of Concern

Journal takes different tacks on two cancer papers with image problems

carcinogenCarcinogenesis has the publishing world’s version of a twin problem: two dysfunctional articles yet one gets retracted while the other merely suffers a correction. Is it nature — or nurture?

Here are the details. One article, “Chemopreventive effect of dietary glutamine on colitis-associated colon tumorigenesis in mice,” came from a group in China. Published earlier this year, the authors seem to have had some trouble with their figures. As the corrigendum explains:  Continue reading Journal takes different tacks on two cancer papers with image problems

Herbicide-ovarian cancer study to be retracted

ehpThe authors of a 2008 study purporting to explain how the herbicide atrazine acts on cancer cells have asked the journal that published it to retract it for “inadvertent errors,” Retraction Watch has learned.

The notice for “G-Protein-Coupled Receptor 30 and Estrogen Receptor-a are Involved in the Proliferative Effects Induced by Atrazine in Ovarian Cancer Cells,” published in Environmental Health Perspectives, will read: Continue reading Herbicide-ovarian cancer study to be retracted

France tries husband-wife team for research misconduct in plagiarism case

Mr Sixou
Michel Sixou

We’re always glad to have guest posts, and here’s one from François-Xavier Coudert, reporting from France.

As we reported the other day, a Nature editorial suggested that police involvement might be an appropriate response to research misconduct. The French seem to agree, based on reports in the media there, as Coudert writes:

A husband-wife team of French odontology researchers at l’université Paul-Sabatier in Toulouse have been on trial in that country for research misconduct. Christine Marchal-Sixou, an associate professor, faces a charge of plagiarism, and Michel Sixou, full professor and dean of the faculty of dental medicine until September, has been charged with complicity. Continue reading France tries husband-wife team for research misconduct in plagiarism case

Should scientific misconduct be handled by the police? It’s fraud week at Nature and Nature Medicine

naturemed1213It’s really hard to get papers retracted, police might be best-equipped to handle scientific misconduct investigations, and there’s finally software that will identify likely image manipulation.

Those are three highlights from a number of pieces that have appeared in Nature and Nature Medicine in the past few weeks. Not surprisingly, there are common threads, so join us as we follow the bouncing ball. Continue reading Should scientific misconduct be handled by the police? It’s fraud week at Nature and Nature Medicine

Same “difference,” as anesthesia paper retracted for plagiarism

Cover, Coverabbild, Titel, TitelbildA group of anesthesiology researchers in China has lost their 2011 paper in Der Anaesthesist because, well, the article wasn’t theirs to begin with.

The paper, “Different anesthesia methods for laparoscopic cholecystectomy,” came from authors at the 309th Hospital of PLA, in Beijing, who purported to report on a randomized trial of 68 patients undergoing laparoscopic colon surgery with either general or spinal (that is, a nerve block) anesthesia. According to the abstract:
Continue reading Same “difference,” as anesthesia paper retracted for plagiarism

Cancer-anorexia paper retracted for “unacceptable” duplication

doveDrug Design, Development and Therapy has retracted a 2013 paper by a group from Italy for duplication.

The retraction notice for the paper, “Drugs in development for treatment of patients with cancer-related anorexia and cachexia syndrome,” fairly bristles with indignation: Continue reading Cancer-anorexia paper retracted for “unacceptable” duplication

Cancer researchers retract two papers in the JBC

jbcTwo cancer researchers who hold a patent on a particular pathway that might be a target for new drugs — and one of whom leads a company that is studying those potential drugs — have retracted two related papers in the Journal of Biological Chemistry (JBC).

The notices for “Kinase suppressor of Ras signals through Thr269 of c-Raf-1” and “The kinase activity of kinase suppressor of Ras1 (KSR1) is independent of bound MEK,” which share H. Rosie Xing and Memorial Sloan-Kettering’s Richard Kolesnick as authors, say the same thing: Continue reading Cancer researchers retract two papers in the JBC

Columbia University misconduct retraction highlights what’s wrong with the retraction process

jcacoverThe Journal of Clinical Anesthesia has a retraction of a 2006 paper by a group from Columbia University that, to our minds, is the poster child for how not to handle such things.

The article, “Dexmedetomidine infusion is associated with enhanced renal function after thoracic surgery,” was written by Robert J. Frumento, Helene G. Logginidou, Staffan Wahlander, Gebhard Wagener, Hugh R. Playford and Robert N. Sladen, who now is chief of critical care at the institution. The paper has been cited 30 times, according to Thomson Scientific’s Web of Knowledge.

Why do we bother to name all the authors? Here’s why: According to the retraction notice, one of them — but don’t ask which — is guilty of research misconduct: Continue reading Columbia University misconduct retraction highlights what’s wrong with the retraction process

Case report journal pulls paper on metastatic ovarian cancer with falsified data

crmedThe journal Case Reports in Medicine has retracted a 2012 article by a group of Turkish authors who made up things in the piece.

The paper, “Brain Metastasis as an Initial Manifestation of Ovarian Carcinoma: A Case Report,” came from ob-gyns at Hacettepe University in Ankara, and purported to relate the case of

A 30-year-old gravida 2, para 2 woman admitted to our hospital with complaints of headache, nausea, vomiting, and right-sided blurred vision. She did not report any previous medical history or malignancy. Her neurologic examination revealed a right optic disc edema suggesting a posterior orbital mass. Her cranial computerized tomography (CT) scan showed multiple lesions that are a 6 mm mass on the right parietal lobe, a 16 mm mass on the left occipital, and another 7 mm mass on the left temporal lobe (Figures 1 and 2). All the lesions were hyperintense and surrounded by edema which suggests a metastatic cancer. Her cranial magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) also confirmed similar findings suggestive of a metastatic cancer to the brain. Continue reading Case report journal pulls paper on metastatic ovarian cancer with falsified data