Slamming The Door

Some stories warrant re-examination. The concurrent controversies at Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas and M.D. Anderson Cancer Center went on for more than two years, from 2012 to 2014, generating dozens of stories.

Events unfold with logic of their own. In this case, questions of integrity of peer review were central to the story. As reporters, we jumped from one fire to another. Then, sometimes, when the story has played out, it’s possible to move on to a reexamination.

This is what we did in this series of 14 stories. The Cancer Letter went back to re-examine these explosive events. The examination is possible in part because of new insight provided by Alfred Gilman, the Nobel laureate who served as the first scientific director of the state institution that distributes $300 million a year. Gilman died on Dec. 23, 2015.

This series re-examines the concurrent controversies at the Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas and MD Anderson Cancer Center. This examination is possible in part because of new insight provided by Alfred Gilman, the Nobel laureate who served as the first scientific director of the state institution that distributes $300 million a year. Gilman died on Dec. 23, 2015.
This series re-examines the concurrent controversies at the Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas and MD Anderson Cancer Center. This examination is possible in part because of new insight provided by Alfred Gilman, a Nobel laureate who served as the first scientific director of the state institution that distributes $300 million a year. Gilman died on Dec. 23, 2015.
In their op-ed piece, Gilman and Sharp stated what it would take to fix CPRIT's problems. That was the polite version of the Gilman Plan.The spoken version was more blunt: get rid of the “assholes” on the oversight board, jettison the administrators, then—maybe—CPRIT's credibility would be restored.

Login