Three medical journals have launched investigations into publications by researchers at Temple University to determine if there was data manipulation.
Three medical journals have launched investigations into publications by researchers at Temple University to determine if there was data manipulation. All of the research is in the area of cardiac health.
Researchers from The Journal of Molecular and Cellular Cardiology and The Journal of Biological Chemistry are leading the investigation into five papers. In August, The Journal of American College of Cardiology (JACC) also retracted a study posted on its website by Temple researchers.
In a statement, JACC indicated its Ethics Board had voted to retract the paper “after questions about specific images were originally raised by a reader.” The editors then requested the authors respond, who then provided original images to replace two of the figures with a subsequent correction.
However, JACC decided the original images raised more concerns and decided “to retract the paper … based on concerns regarding the splicing and/or duplication of Western blot images.”
Temple University, based in Philadelphia, launched its own investigation in September 2020 at the request of the U.S. Office of Research Integrity (ORI). The ORI is part of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). It oversees and directs Public Health Service (PHS) research integrity activities for the Secretary of HHS outside of regulatory research duties of the FDA.
Temple’s investigation includes 15 research studies published from 2008 to 2020 that were supported by grants from the National Institutes of Health. Nine of those papers were led by Abdel Karim Sabri, Ph.D., a professor at Temple’s Cardiovascular Research Center.
Another member of the Temple faculty, Steven Houser, Ph.D., senior associate dean of research at Temple, is also a listed author of five studies led by Sabri and was involved in four more papers being analyzed.
Houser, who sued to halt Temple University’s investigation, indicates he helped review and edit some parts of the text in the studies supervised by Sabri. However, he did not provide data or analyze it.
A former president of the American Heart Association, Houser stated the university was “engaging in sweeping extra-judicial discovery,” per an opinion issued in 2021 by Judge Wendy Beetlestone. His suit was declined since Temple University was running its investigation at the request of the ORI.
Christopher Ezold, Houser’s attorney, stated that Houser “has not engaged in scientific or other misconduct, has not falsified data and has not participated in any bad acts with any other scientist or academic.”
Scientific publications often involve multiple authors. These authors are responsible for writing or reviewing part, but not necessarily all, of a paper. In some cases, they are involved in research at some level but did no more than review for the senior and lead author or authors.
As Reuters notes, “the ultimate responsibility for a study usually lies with the supervising scientist and any researcher who contributed the specific data under scrutiny.”
Daniel L. Van Dyke, PhD., professor emeritus, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine - Hematology, and Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, who was not involved with the studies, told BioSpace, “I support critical reviews as much as I support the scientific method generally. Lapses in scientific integrity by a post-doc or technologist, or the team leader, can damage the reputation of all of the coauthors, and in medical research can harm patients.”
Van Dyke added, “Investigations of innocent errors as well as fraud are important — that stuff happens. Unfortunately, harm to the reputation of (relatively) innocent coauthors and universities can happen, too.”
The typical procedure for a peer-reviewed technical publication is for the manuscript to be submitted to the journal. It will then be distributed to multiple experts in the field, who will review the paper to determine its technical accuracy and appropriateness for publication.
If the peer reviewers have questions or issues with materials in the journal, they can ask for clarifications and more data, then recommend further review, rejection or acceptance.
“We are committed to preserving the integrity of the scholarly record,” stated Elsevier, a major publisher of technical journals, owner of the Journal of Molecular and Cellular Cardiology and publisher of the two other journals for medical societies.
Two researchers with Janssen Pharmaceuticals, a Johnson & Johnson company, were listed as co-authors of the JACC paper. Janssen manufactures Xarelto, part of the retracted study.
The company told Reuters that Temple’s supervising researchers did not notify the company about the investigation or the retraction, nor were the company staffers’ contributions to the paper questioned in the retraction.
