Stem Cell Research
This article was originally published in SRA
Executive Summary
Science journals react to fraudulent research papers
Science journals react to fraudulent research papers
Leading scientific journals are evaluating the standards they demand for the publication of scientific papers on cloning after Science retracted two of South Korean scientist Hwang Woo Suk's stem cell papers over doubts about their authenticity.
Mr Hwang's team from Seoul National University, which was supported by the South Korean Ministry of Science and Technology, found fame when it used somatic stem cell nuclear transfer to isolate the first human embryonic stem cell which specifically matches the DNA of patients suffering from diseases such as Parkinson's or spinal cord injury1.
However, a Seoul University investigation concluded two of the team's papers, which were published in the journal Science in June 2005 and May 2004, were fraudulent and the result of serious research misconduct2,3. It said that claims about the number of stem cell lines that were created were unverifiable. The authors of the 2005 paper had already agreed to a retraction, but after the university's announcement, Science also decided to retract the 2004 paper.
In a statement, Science's editor-in-chief, Donald Kennedy, said that the journal would call on outside experts to help it review its procedures for evaluating scientific papers before they are published4.
In its reaction, the journal Nature said that `peer review aims to assess credibility but is by and large incapable of detecting dishonesty'5. It questioned what data would be sufficient as proof of cloning, when peer review will continue to be largely based on trust. Nevertheless, it is considering how much data should be provided in the future, and suggested that authors may have to require additional raw data. Additionally, authors will also be asked to provide mitochondrial DNA fingerprints for all cloning papers they submit to Nature. It rejected requests that it make independent tests to verify cloning claims a condition of publishing cloning papers. However, it encouraged scientists to seek independent verification themselves, and then to report to Nature on the results of these tests. It is considering other changes and invites feedback.
Resignation
The University of Pittsburgh launched its own investigation after learning that some high-resolution stem cell images in the 2005 Science paper were duplicates. One of its staff, Gerald Schatten, had been a co-author of the paper. The university started the enquiry in November 2005, after Mr Schatten alerted Science about allegations in the Korean press that ova from paid donors and members of Mr Hwang's research team had been used for the 2004 paper. Mr Schatten said that as a result he would not work with Mr Hwang again.
Mr Hwang subsequently resigned from his post as head of the World Stem Cell Hub, and other official positions, after admitting that he had in fact used unethically sourced ova, as alleged6.
References
1. American Association for the Advancement of Science, letter, 12 January 2006, www.aaas.org
2. Woo Suk Hwang et al, Patient-Specific Embryonic Stem Cells Derived from Human SCNT Blastocysts, Science, 17 June 2005, 308(5729), 1777-1783
3. Woo Suk Hwang et al, Evidence of a Pluripotent Human Embryonic Stem Cell Line Derived from a Cloned Blastocyst, Science, 19 May 2004, 303(5664), 1669-1674
4. Science editorial statement, 10 January 2006, www.sciencemag.org/sciext/hwang2005/kennedy_20060110_transcript.pdf
5. Standards for papers on cloning, Nature, 19 January 2006, 439(7074)
6. The Regulatory Affairs Journal - Pharma, 2005, 17(1), 42