The Economist takes a look at the Anil Potti misconduct case at Duke University — Potti, Joseph Nevins, and colleagues published reports saying that they could predict lung cancer progression based on gene expression levels determined using microarrays. Questions began to arise about the science as well as about some claims Potti made on various documents. This led to a number of papers being retracted, clinical trials being halted, and investigations being started. Potti resigned from his position at Duke. "The whole thing, then, is a mess," The Economist says.
In addition, Ivan Oransky at Retraction Watch reports that Potti also failed to disclose corporate ties that he had at the time that he published two Journal of the American Medical Association papers. (Those papers were not among those retracted.) Further, Potti, Nevins, Duke, and others are being sued by clinical trial patients or their estates. The lawsuit "emphasizes, as you would expect, that Duke and the Potti team were warned repeatedly about problems in their work, notably by Keith Baggerly and a colleague," Oransky writes.