Research findings are not often retracted because of possible falsification of data. When medical treatment is based on falsified data, the potential for patient harm increases and lack of trust in the process that leads to evidence-based clinical decision making is substantial. A case involving a Duke University cancer physician-scientist who admitted basing human clinical trials of genomic signatures predicting chemotherapy sensitivity in breast, lung, and ovarian cancer on false data (Potti et al., 2006) is particularly egregious.
Couzin-Frankel, J. (2011). Flawed cancer trial at Duke spurs lawsuit. Retrieved from <a target="_blank" href='http://news.sciencemag.org/scienceinsider/2011/09/flawed-cancer-trial-at...
Goldberg, P. (2009). Duke University suspends two clinical trials after journal paper questions assay validity. <i>Cancer Letter, 35</i>, 1, 7-8.
Goozner, M. (2011). Duke scandal highlights need for genomics research criteria. <i>Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 103</i>, 916-917. doi:10.1093/jnci/djr231
Potti, A., Dressman, H.K., Bild, A., Riedel, R.F., Chan, G., Sayer, R., … Nevins, J. (2006). Genomic signatures to guide the use of chemotherapeutics. <i>Nature Medicine, 12</i>, 1294-1300. doi:10.1038/nm1491