After enduring more than 2 years criticism that included evidence of contamination and misrepresentation of data, a science paper that linked a mouse retrovirus to chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) today received its last rites: Editor Chief Bruce Alberts issued a full retraction. 13 authors of the study in September signed a partial withdrawal after one of the three collaborating laboratories have found that contamination had marred his contribution, but they could not agree on the wording of the full retraction, Alberts therefore issued without approval. " Science has lost confidence in the report and the validity of its conclusions," wrote Alberts in an "editorial" unusual retraction, which appears in the December issue 23 Science . " it is Science 's opinion that a retraction signed by all the authors is not likely to come. "
researchers from the Whittemore Peterson Institute for Neuro-immune Disease (WPI) Reno, Nevada, conducted the controversial study, teaming with researchers from the National cancer Institute (NCI) and the Cleveland clinic in Ohio. as they reported online in the issue of October 8, 09 Science , they found evidence of a mouse virus called xenotropic virus related to murine leukemia virus (XMRV) in the blood of 67% of 101 CFS patients they analyzed. alarmingly 3.7% of controls were also tested positive, leading to fears that XMRV could be widely contaminate the blood supply in many countries.
Shortly after, researchers around the world began reporting that they could not find the virus in CFS patients. One group found that XMRV was probably created in laboratory experiments with mice that have an immortalized cell line to study prostate cancer and another showed that variants of this line had evolved more isolates XMRV, exactly the opposite of what would be expected if the mouse virus infected humans and really was subjected to immune pressure. The Department of Health and Human Services United States organized a study of nine laboratory to determine if the blood supply was at risk of XMRV or related mouse retroviruses. This so-called Group which included blood work WPI and NCI researchers who co-authored the original Science study using all the tests they chose, reported online September 22 in Science that no one could reliably detect the virus into previously positive samples from patients.
Alberts said the finding of the Blood Working Group was the straw that led Science to request the complete withdrawal. "The blood of study for me was dramatic evidence of poor science," Alberts said. "He gave us absolutely no confidence in the ability of large laboratories involved for testing. I find this extremely disturbing. "Francis Ruscetti NCI, a major retrovirologist and one of the co-authors, tried to coordinate with colleagues retraction, but a dispute arose over language that suggests some of the conclusions in the original document is still valid. "We tried to get all the authors agree, but he got endless," said Alberts. "the responsibility Science magazine in the scientific community is to make a strong statement that we do not believe that anything in this document may be invoked. "
Judy Mikovits ofWPI, who conducted the study with Ruscetti, said she and two of his lab assistants that contribute refused to sign the retraction. the day after the publication of the study of blood working Group Mikovits presented new data at a meeting of the CFS in Ottawa, Canada, which sought to show evidence of human gamma retrovirus XMRV-the family belongs to patients. It essentially argued that the original document focused too narrowly on a variant of XMRV. (It also showed a slide in the meeting that led to Science discovered that the original document had mislabeled image, which account in the fully retracted.) "We were confident of our data," Mikovits said science Insider, explaining why they wanted to include a line in the retraction who said they still trusted their data and conclusions. Ruscetti declined to comment about the complete withdrawal.
Mikovits was fired by WPI week after the Ottawa meeting for insubordination and accused in a civil lawsuit by his former employer of embezzling laboratory notebooks and computer data on his studies. Police at the University of Nevada, Reno, then filed a warrant for his arrest in connection with the allegedly stolen material, and was briefly imprisoned. Both civil and criminal cases are being considered.
Mikovits and Ruscetti currently participating in a pathogen coordinated MultiLab study sleuth Ian Lipkin at Columbia University in New York City that will look XMRV and related viruses in many more CFS patients that were analyzed in the work group study blood. Mikovits said the study of $ 2.3 million, funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases of the United States, has also taken into account in the decision not to sign the full withdrawal. "We believe it is premature to do something before it's over," said Mikovits, who believes they will have results within two months.
Alberts strongly disagree. "I think they should cancel this study, "said Alberts." It's over. They can not do the tests, so what's the point? Why should he give a different result from that of the blood group study? Maybe retracting help us to scale back how much money they spent on it. It seems like an incredible waste. "
Researchers who have closely followed this saga and invested their own efforts to find XMRV in CFS patients congratulate Science to issue a full retraction." It is very sad, but the writing is on the wall for some time and the font size got bigger during the year, "said Jonathan Stoye retrovirologist the Medical Research Council in London, who co-authored an editorial science supporting the original document. John Coffin, a retrovirologist at Tufts University in Boston, who wrote an editorial with Stoye, said the full withdrawal could have happened much earlier. "It is a bit of a surprise that it took so long," said Coffin.
Science Editor Monica Bradford said the review authors still prefer to sign retractions. "He is the work of the authors and is a very clear signal to the scientific community that can not be other charges of the agenda, "said Bradford. Alberts said they had simply been" spun "by authors too often for too long. "If our editorial retraction contributes to ending the resources to go to this useless effort, I think we have made a contribution to the scientific community," he said.
See also :. lawyer Judy Mikovits discusses developments in his criminal case
Update, 3:35 p.m. Paper co-author Robert Silverman of the Lerner College Cleveland Clinic Medicine of Case Western Reserve University has sent this statement to science Insider:
I asked for a complete withdrawal of our results this summer after finding that blood samples were contaminated. I was in favor of a withdrawal from the entire paper at the time. I am pleased that the Journal has granted a retraction of the whole paper, and I agree with that decision.
0 Komentar