Brain Tumour Research Centre, Institute of Biomedical and Biomolecular Sciences, IBBS, University of Portsmouth, PO1 2DT, UK.
Centre for Biomedical Research (CBMR), University of Algarve, Campus of Gambelas, Building 8, Room 3.4, 8005-139, Faro, Portugal.
Cancer Lett. 2019 Aug 28;458:29-38. doi: 10.1016/j.canlet.2019.05.028. Epub 2019 May 23.
This article has been retracted at the request of the Editor-in-Chief due to concerns regarding the legitimacy of images and data presented in the paper. Though a corrigendum (Can. Lett. Vol. 469, 2020, pages 524-535) was previously published to address some of these concerns, this corrigendum has also been found to contain errors and therefore cannot stand. Specific concerns are listed below. The Editor and Publisher received a letter from the University of Portsmouth alerting us to an investigation into alleged research misconduct. The University concluded their investigation with external experts and determined that misconduct did take place in relation to the research involved in this paper. Upon our separate investigation, it has been determined that the paper headline relies on showing that there was considerable reduction of IGF1R, IL6R and EGFR post treatment in all cell lines. During review, it was determined that this cannot be concluded from the presented data. For example, in SEBTA-003 the EGFR levels go up and there is no difference in IGFR1. It is apparent from Fig 4d that in the SEBTA-003 cell line the EGFR level does not go down, which is stated in the Results section on page 32, it is rather going up. The data for IGFR1 are inconclusive and there are concerns regarding the blot. The general implications would be that the effects of the drug IP1867B does not seem to be the same for all tested cell lines, and this should have been discussed in detail by the authors. Additionally, in subsequent experiments (Fig. 4g and h) the SEBTA-003 cell line (no reduction of EGFR, rather increased expression) and the other 3 cell lines (reduction of EGFR) show similar responses. This is particularly evident in Fig. 4g: Two cell lines are compared, SEBTA-003 (increased EGFR expression) and UP-029 (decreased EGFR expression), both behave similarly after exposure to drugs. The corrigendum (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.canlet.2019.10.002) issue is with respect to the Supplemental Figure 6i EGFR, particularly panel IP1867B. The Corrigendum states that the left part is a cut out of the very right part. If so, the bands for IP1867B should show the same staining pattern - but they do not. Also, in the Corrigendum, there are incorrect mentions between day 14 in the Figure and day 19 in the Figure legend. All authors were informed of the retraction in advance. Drs. Pritchard and Duckworth agreed to the retraction. The corresponding author, Dr Hill, did not agree to the retraction. No response had been received from Drs. Mihajluk, Simms, Reay, Madureira, Howarth, Murray, Nasser and Pilkinton at the time of the retraction being published.
这篇文章已应主编的要求撤回,原因是对论文中呈现的图像和数据的合法性存在担忧。尽管之前发表了更正(Can. Lett. Vol. 469, 2020, pages 524-535)以解决其中一些担忧,但该更正也被发现存在错误,因此不能成立。具体关注的问题如下。编辑和出版商收到朴茨茅斯大学的一封信,提醒我们对涉嫌研究不当行为的调查。该大学与外部专家一起完成了他们的调查,并确定在与本文相关的研究中确实存在不当行为。在我们单独的调查中,已确定论文标题依赖于显示所有细胞系在治疗后 IGF1R、IL6R 和 EGFR 的表达都有明显减少。在审查期间,确定从呈现的数据中无法得出这一结论。例如,在 SEBTA-003 中,EGFR 水平升高,而 IGF1 没有差异。从图 4d 中明显看出,在 SEBTA-003 细胞系中,EGFR 水平并没有下降,这在第 32 页的结果部分中有所说明,而是上升了。IGFR1 的数据没有定论,并且对印迹存在担忧。一般来说,这意味着 IP1867B 药物的作用似乎对所有测试的细胞系都不一样,作者应该对此进行详细讨论。此外,在后续实验(图 4g 和 h)中,SEBTA-003 细胞系(EGFR 没有减少,而是表达增加)和其他 3 个细胞系(EGFR 减少)表现出相似的反应。这在图 4g 中尤为明显:比较了两个细胞系,SEBTA-003(EGFR 表达增加)和 UP-029(EGFR 表达减少),两者在接触药物后均表现出相似的反应。更正(https://doi.org/10.1016/j.canlet.2019.10.002)问题涉及补充图 6i EGFR,特别是 IP1867B 部分。更正说明左边部分是从非常右边部分切出的。如果是这样,IP1867B 的条带应该显示相同的染色模式-但它们没有。此外,在更正中,图中的第 14 天和图注中的第 19 天之间存在不正确的提及。所有作者都提前被告知了撤回。普里查德博士和达克沃思博士同意撤回。通讯作者希尔博士不同意撤回。在发布撤回通知时,米哈卢克博士、西姆斯博士、雷博士、马杜雷拉博士、豪厄尔博士、默里博士、纳瑟尔博士和皮尔金顿博士均未对此做出回应。