Feature

Dana-Farber Moves to Retract, Correct Dozens of Cancer Papers Amid Allegations


 

Officials at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute are moving to retract at least six published research papers and correct 31 others amid allegations of data manipulation.

News of the investigation follows a blog post by British molecular biologist Sholto David, MD, who flagged almost 60 papers published between 1997 and 2017 that contained image manipulation and other errors. Some of the papers were published by Dana-Farber’s chief executive officer, Laurie Glimcher, MD, and chief operating officer, William Hahn, MD, on topics including multiple myeloma and immune cells.

Mr. David, who blogs about research integrity, highlighted numerous errors and irregularities, including copying and pasting images across multiple experiments to represent different days within the same experiment, sometimes rotating or stretching images.

In one case, Mr. David equated the manipulation with tactics used by “hapless Chinese papermills” and concluded that “a swathe of research coming out of [Dana-Farber] authored by the most senior researchers and managers appears to be hopelessly corrupt with errors that are obvious from just a cursory reading the papers.”

“Imagine what mistakes might be found in the raw data if anyone was allowed to look!” he wrote.

Barrett Rollins, MD, PhD, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute’s research integrity officer, declined to comment on whether the errors represent scientific misconduct, according to STAT. Rollins told ScienceInsider that the “presence of image discrepancies in a paper is not evidence of an author’s intent to deceive.”

Access to new artificial intelligence tools is making it easier for data sleuths, like Mr. David, to unearth data manipulation and errors.

The current investigation closely follows two other investigations into the published work of Harvard University’s former president, Claudine Gay, and Stanford University’s former president, Marc Tessier-Lavigne, which led both to resign their posts.

A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.

Recommended Reading

Supercharge your medical practice with ChatGPT: Here’s why you should upgrade
MDedge Dermatology
10% of US physicians work for or under UnitedHealth. Is that a problem?
MDedge Dermatology
Doctors Win $7 Million Settlement in EEOC Forced Retirement Case
MDedge Dermatology
Physician-Owned Hospitals: The Answer for Better Care?
MDedge Dermatology
Male Surgeons Linked With Higher Subsequent Healthcare Costs
MDedge Dermatology
Why Do MDs Have Such a High Rate of Eating Disorders?
MDedge Dermatology
Panel Recommends Small Bump in 2025 Medicare Physician Pay
MDedge Dermatology
New Federal Rule for Prior Authorizations a ‘Major Win’ for Patients, Doctors
MDedge Dermatology
Oncologists Sound the Alarm About Rise of White Bagging
MDedge Dermatology
Why Don’t Physicians Call In Sick?
MDedge Dermatology