Mariano Barbacid’s study on pancreatic cancer is withdrawn due to conflict of interest

The academy, as reported by the Spanish newspaper El País and confirmed by EFE, has decided to withdraw that article after verifying that they had not revealed that conflict of interest at the time of its submission, since Mariano Barbacid and two of the co-authors of the work, Vasiliki Liaki and Carmen Guerra, have financial interests in Vega Oncotargets, which was created with the aim of developing therapies against this type of cancer, one of the most aggressive.

The magazine has published the retraction of this article. He has reported that PNAS’s editorial policy for contributions states that Academy members who have competing interests, financial or otherwise, that could be considered to significantly influence their objectivity or create an “unfair” competitive advantage for any person or organization linked to the research, “must submit their work as a direct submission.”

The Barbacid team at the National Cancer Research Center of Spain (CNIO) published in that journal the results of a research work that allowed them to eliminate the most common pancreatic cancer, ductal adenocarcinoma, in mice with a three-drug combination therapy that prevents the emergence of resistance and has no major side effects.

The therapy would be the first to achieve complete healing in experimental models and to publicize the results of his work, Mariano Barbacid appeared before the media at a press conference last January, together with the main researchers, those responsible for the CRIS Foundation against cancer, and patients.

The United States Academy of Sciences, of which Mariano Barbacid is a member, has decided to withdraw the article for not disclosing this “relevant” conflict of interest at the time of its submission.

In a statement, the researcher refers to a mere formal issue in the publication of the study by the United States Academy of Sciences.

“The truth is that, when submitting the work (…) for publication, in the section relating to possible ‘conflicts of interest’, they forgot to mention the links with the company Vega Oncotargets, without any bad faith or desire to conceal it.”

Given that the article was published as a contribution from a member of the academy, the internal procedure requires the omission to be corrected, not by adding a simple note, but by retracting the article, according to “the strict rules” of the Academy, explains Barbacid.

The scientist details that the note from that institution that they received on March 19 said: “We want to emphasize that the value of the research itself is not in doubt; however, we must ensure that all publications adhere to PNAS policies and standards.”

According to the researcher, “as a ‘solution’ to correct the formal omission made, they offered us to resubmit the article as ‘Direct Submission’, that is, the standard method for scientists who are not members of the Academy, something we already did a couple of weeks ago, so the article will be published again shortly.”

“In short, a storm in a teacup,” Barbacid told EFE via email.

Barbacid, who mentions that Vega Oncoytargets does not have any other commercial or business activity outside of the Triple Therapy project, reiterates its gratitude to the people who have trusted its research group and guarantees them that “the defect in form that has been committed in the publication of the article does not affect either the solidity of the scientific results or the project that continues its path,” the statement states.

When asked by the CNIO about this issue, there are no comments at the moment. However, the institution’s Code of Good Practice mentions that all researchers must communicate and justify their real or potential conflicts of interest.

These may be of a legal, ethical, moral, economic, personal, academic or other nature; They must be disclosed prior to or at the time of submission of a publication.