Majority of Landmark Cancer Studies Cannot Be Replicated
April 6th, 2012Mmm hmm.
Via: Slashdot:
“During a decade as head of global cancer research at Amgen, C. Glenn Begley identified 53 ‘landmark’ publications — papers in top journals, from reputable labs — for his team to reproduce. Begley sought to double-check the findings before trying to build on them for drug development. Result: 47 of the 53 could not be replicated. He described his findings in a commentary piece published on Wednesday in the journal Nature (paywalled) . … But they and others fear the phenomenon is the product of a skewed system of incentives that has academics cutting corners to further their careers.”
Related: American Society for Microbiology: ‘Has Modern Science Become Dysfunctional?’
From same Reuters article :
Some authors required the Amgen scientists sign a confidentiality agreement barring them from disclosing data at odds with the original findings. “The world will never know” which 47 studies — many of them highly cited — are apparently wrong, Begley said.
This kind of crap seriously undermines the entire process of science, from basic experimentation to peer-review. This is especially true when we add in the involvement of private corporate interest.
Luckily much of the shenanigans are being caught, but it’s only going to get worse. We really need to do something about this if we want to be able to trust the research being done.