Impact factor mania and publish-or-perish may have contributed to Dana-Farber retractions, experts say

Learning from past errors (and misconduct) in cancer research

Share on facebook
Share on twitter
Share on linkedin
Share on email
Share on print

More than a decade ago, Glenn Begley and Lee Ellis published a paper with astounding findings: of 53 “landmark” studies, only six, or 11%, were reproducible, even with the same reagents and the same protocols—and even, sometimes, in the same laboratory—as the original study.

To access this subscriber-only content please log in or subscribe.

If your institution has a site license, log in with IP-login or register for a sponsored account.*
*Not all site licenses are enrolled in sponsored accounts.

Login Subscribe
Jacquelyn Cobb
Associate Editor
Table of Contents

YOU MAY BE INTERESTED IN

For nearly 25 years, business executive Lou Weisbach and urologist Richard J. Boxer have argued that finding the money to finance the cures for devastating diseases is not as difficult as it appears. To start finding the cures, the U.S. Department of the Treasury needs to issue some bonds—$750 billion worth. Next, you hire CEOs—one...

Primary results from the phase III POD1UM-303/InterAACT 2 trial of retifanlimab (Zynyz), a humanized monoclonal antibody targeting programmed death receptor-1, in combination with carboplatin and paclitaxel (platinum-based chemotherapy) in adult patients with inoperable locally recurrent or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the anal cancer who have not been previously treated with systemic chemotherapy, were published in The Lancet. 
Jacquelyn Cobb
Associate Editor

Never miss an issue!

Get alerts for our award-winning coverage in your inbox.

Login