Pfizer has retracted a 2009 Journal of Clinical Oncology study purporting to show a benefit of their experimental drug for lung cancer figitumumab after discovering that its clinical lead on the project had done analyses improperly.
Here’s the text of the notice: Continue reading Pfizer retracts study of experimental cancer treatment figitumumab for incorrect analyses
The retraction counts keep mounting for two Retraction Watch frequent flyers.
First, Diederik Stapel’s 26th retraction, according to our count. Psychologist Stapel admitted to making up data in dozens of studies, and is also facing a criminal inquiry for misuse of funds.
Here’s the notice: Continue reading Lemus, Stapel each rack up another retraction
Every now and then, we’re accused of “gotcha journalism” here at Retraction Watch. But here’s the story of a paper that we hope you’ll agree is “gotcha” science of the best kind, involving a different kind of retraction. The research is of, shall we say, a pressing problem known as Tie Retraction Syndrome, or TRS for short, brought to the world’s attention by a group of ophthalmologists in Germany and the UK.
According to the paper in Orbit, TRS is: Continue reading Tie Retraction Syndrome? Fat chance
A bit of intellectual property indiscretion has led to the retraction of a paper by Korean scientists. Although the details are fuzzy, several of the authors are affiliated with a Korean pharma company called SK.
The paper, “A Novel Carbamoyloxy Arylalkanoyl Arylpiperazine Compound (SKL-NP) Inhibits Hyperpolarization-Activated Cyclic Nucleotide-Gated (HCN) Channel Currents in Rat Dorsal Root Ganglion Neurons,” was published in the The Korean Journal of Physiology & Pharmacology earlier this year.
According to the retraction notice: Continue reading Loose lips sink paper on company’s experimental pain drug
Monica Acalovschi is serious about ridding the literature of duplicate publications.
That would seem to be the message of two new retraction notices in the Journal of Gastrointestinal and Liver Diseases, which Acalovschi edits — two retractions that join another for similar reasons, which we covered earlier this year.
Here are the notices, from the June issue of the journal (but which were just indexed by Medline):
For “Intestinal Pseudo-obstruction – a Rare Condition with Heterogeneous Etiology and Unpredictable Outcome. A Case Report:” Continue reading Gastro journal continues tough stance on duplication, with two new retractions
October, apparently, is “studies of retractions month.” First there was a groundbreaking study in PNAS, then an NBER working paper, and yesterday PLoS Medicine alerted us to a paper their sister journal, PLoS ONE, published last week, “A Comprehensive Survey of Retracted Articles from the Scholarly Literature.”
The study, by Michael L. Grieneisen and Minghua Zhang, is comprehensive indeed, reaching further back into the literature than others we’ve seen, and also including more disciplines: Continue reading Most retraction notices don’t involve research misconduct or flawed data: new study
A new study from a group of Boston-area economists sheds some light on whether retractions have downstream effects on related fields, particularly when it comes to funding. From the abstract of the working paper, called simply “Retractions,” by Pierre Azoulay, Jeffrey L. Furman, Joshua L. Krieger, and Fiona E. Murray:
We find that scientifi c misconduct stifle scientists’ pursuit of specifi c research lines, as we would anticipate if retraction events provide new signals of the fidelity of scienti fic knowledge. More centrally, our findings show that Continue reading Collateral damage: What effect do retractions have on scientific funding?
A prominent researcher at the University of Florida is under federal investigation for research misconduct and has lost at least one paper as a result of the fraud.
The researcher, Nasser Chegini, was a professor of obstetrics and gynecology at the U of Florida until about six months ago, when he retired, according to the chair’s office. Nasser has received at least $4 million in federal grant funding, according to the university.
The retracted paper, “MicroRNA 21: response to hormonal therapies and regulatory function in leiomyoma, transformed leiomyoma and leiomyosarcoma cells,” was published in 2010 by Molecular Human Reproduction. The authors were Qun Pan and Xiaoping Luo and Chegini.
As the notice explains: Continue reading ORI investigating University of Florida ob-gyn researcher accused of misconduct
Plasma Processes and Polymers has retracted a paper it published in March 2012 for what it describes as a “possible breach of ethics.”
That certainly sounds bad — if inconclusive — but the authors maintain the whole thing was a simple misunderstanding.
The article, “Plasma Acid: Water Treated by Dielectric Barrier Discharge,” came from the lab of Gary Friedman, a physicist at Drexel University in Philadelphia. The first, and corresponding, author was Natalie Shainsky, an award-winning graduate student at the school.
As the notice states: Continue reading Authors dispute ethical lapse in case of double physics publication that wasn’t
A difficult authorship dispute, involving two journals and at least two continents, has led to an Expression of Concern in the Brazilian Journal of Rheumatology.
Here’s the Expression of Concern: Continue reading Bitter authorship issues prompt Expression of Concern in rheumatology journal