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

Patients saw a 35% reduced risk of disease progression or death for Trodelvy (sacituzumab govitecan-hziy) plus Keytruda (pembrolizumab) (n=221) versus standard of care Keytruda plus chemotherapy (n=222), according to the positive phase III ASCENT-04/KEYNOTE-D19 study evaluating the combination of Trodelvy plus Keytruda in first-line PD-L1+ (CPS ≥10) metastatic triple-negative breast cancer. 
Jacquelyn Cobb
Associate Editor

Never miss an issue!

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

Login