Top doctor resigns amid falsified data probe
Sylvia Asa and UHN co-authors stand by their findings on the genetics of breast cancer
A top Toronto doctor has stepped down from running the country’s largest medical laboratory amid a University Health Network (UHN) investigation that found falsified data in two scientific articles she co-authored.
The papers, which describe the genetics of breast cancer, were authored jointly by UHN physicians Dr. Sylvia Asa and her husband, Dr. Shereen Ezzat, and two other authors.
The papers, originally published in the May and December 2010 editions of the American Journal of Pathology, have since been retracted.
According to a notice in the publication’s latest issue, the authors agreed with the retraction but stood by their findings.
“We wish to state we have collectively confirmed the validity and reproducibility of the findings,” wrote Ezzat. “Nevertheless, we request that these papers be retracted.”
Both Asa and Ezzat declined to com- ment when contacted at their home Sunday; neither responded to phone calls or emails to their workplace.
The Star has since learned the authors have asked for a judicial review of the investigative committee’s findings in provincial court, according to UHN spokesperson Gillian Howard. She would not say whether the investigation is complete or still ongoing.
Howard did confirm Asa and Ezzat’s research lab had been suspended as a result of the investigation, affecting 10 staff and research trainees.
Details are scarce surrounding the UHN-led investigation. The retraction notice reads that investigators found the presence of “manipulated and/or fabricated data” in the form of several figures used in the papers.
Skepticism originally arose over the articles in 2012, after the journal’s editors received notice from a concerned reader.
When communication with Dr. Ezzat failed to resolve the matter, the editorial office requested the UHN launch an investigation. Further in the retraction notice, it is revealed the committee informed the journal’s editors this past April “that the articles in question contained falsified data.”
A source with knowledge of the incident told the Star the committee asked the authors for original source data and it was not provided.
According to the American Journal of Pathology’s ethical standards, every author listed in an article is responsible for its content.
“The corresponding author is also asked if all authors have read and approved of the submission, at every version submitted,” wrote the journal’s managing editor, Audra Cox, in an email to the Star.
Before resigning from her leadership position in the spring, Asa had led the University Health Network’s Laboratory Medicine Program since 2000. As medical director, she earned just over $430,000 last year, according to the Ontario sunshine list.
It is not clear if she stepped down as a result of the investigation.
Today, Asa remains employed by the UHN as a clinical pathologist while Ezzat continues in his role as physician.
Also, the retraction notice by itself does not provide enough information to fully understand who is at fault, according to Retraction Watch cofounder, Dr. Ivan Oransky.
“All we know is that Dr. Asa’s name was on papers that contained the falsified images,” he said. “And she has stepped down from her position as program medical director of the lab.”
Together, the two doctors have previously co-authored more than 90 other works, according to the U.S. National Library of Medicine’s PubMed.gov database.
Throughout the past 16 years, Asa and Ezzat have been named recipients of more than $3.2 million worth of government grant money, according to the Canadian Institutes of Health Research’s Information System database.
According to the articles, the pair’s
“Even if one variable in the study has been altered or compromised, it puts the whole study under a cloud of suspicion.” COLLEEN DERKATCH VICE-CHAIR OF THE RESEARCH ETHICS BOARD AT RYERSON UNIVERSITY
research involved human breast tissue samples. It is “highly probable” these samples were obtained from UHN patients, according to Howard.
The cost of committing one of science’s most egregious sins can taint an entire study’s results.
“Even if one variable in the study has been altered or compromised, it puts the whole study under a cloud of suspicion,” said Colleen Derkatch, vice-chair of the research ethics board at Ryerson University.
But just one intentionally incorrect study deals damage to the credibility of researchers everywhere, said Raywat Deonandan, a health sciences professor at the University of Ottawa.
“It is pretty serious. It is as bad as it can get,” Deonandan said. “Any time there is a falsification in science, it is a black mark on all of us.
“This puts more bullets in the guns of people aiming to kill science and show it as untrustworthy.”