Stanford University president Marc Tessier-Lavigne made his first major public statement on Monday since accusations of possible research misconduct surfaced, saying that he believed in the accuracy of contested data in papers he co-authored.
“I am dedicated to the rigorous pursuit of the truth,” said Tessier-Lavigne, in a letter to Stanford faculty. “The integrity of my work is of paramount importance to me, and I take any concerns that are expressed very seriously.”
“I want to be clear that I have never submitted a paper without firmly believing that the data were correct and accurately presented,” he said in the statement. “I also want to be clear that I take responsibility for any concerns that arise with respect to any work with which I have been involved.”
Experts have identified at least seven papers co-authored by neuroscientist Tessier-Lavigne with allegedly suspect images.
In three of these instances, Tessier-Lavigne had long ago reported the problems to the journals, but the journals took no action.
Stanford’s board of trustees announced late last week that it would appoint a special committee to investigate the concerns, first described on the website PubPeer and reported by The Stanford Daily.
The allegations don’t suggest that the scientific conclusions of the papers were inaccurate. Rather, some of the supporting images seem to have been manipulated. In one instance, an image appears to have been duplicated, then flipped. Another image seems to have been copied. Still another contains a photo that creates a distorted perspective.
Some seem to be the result of intentional editing, while others could have been errors due to poor labeling, miscommunication or careless lab work.
The problems, first reported anonymously, were confirmed by an analysis by Elisabeth Bik, a nationally recognized expert in image analysis and research integrity.
Tessier-Lavigne, former president of Rockefeller University who was also once chief scientific officer at Genentech, is nationally respected for his research into brain development and repair, especially the proteins that govern the growth of key nerve fibers in the developing spinal cord.
He was the senior author in three of the papers: a 1999 Cell paper, and two papers published in Science in 2001.
Typically, the senior author oversees the production of the data and the experimental design on an ongoing basis — daily, weekly, or monthly, said experts.
The people in the lab who are actually doing the work send the senior author their data. Or they sit down as a team, together, and review it. Then, before a paper is submitted to a journal, they go through it all again, to catch any errors.
Shortly before his appointment as president of Stanford in 2016, Tessier-Lavigne told the journal Science in 2015 that concerns had been raised about multiple images in these papers. Holden Thorp, editor-in-chief of Science, confirmed that corrections were submitted, but “due to an error” were not posted.
“We regret this error, apologize to the scientific community, and will be sharing our next steps as they relate to these two papers as soon as possible,” Thorp said in a statement.
Tessier-Lavigne had also contacted the journal Cell in 2015 with concerns about the 1999 paper. At the time, Cell editors “evaluated the issues” and told Tessier-Lavigne “they did not think that further action was warranted,” according to a statement. The journal Cell has since opened its own review of the research.
New concerns recently have been raised about another image in one of the Science papers and one in the Cell paper, “and I have been in communication with the editors of both journals to determine the appropriate next steps,” Tessier-Lavigne said.
Of the four other papers, Tessier-Lavigne was a middle author.
Ideally, anyone listed as an author on a paper should review the data, said one biologist, who asked that his name not be used due to the sensitivity of the Stanford investigation. But that can be impractical on large papers, with many authors.
Tessier-Lavigne said did not contribute to the data in those papers, he said. Rather, they came from other labs, led by other members of the team.
Stanford’s Board of Trustees has assembled a special committee to investigate the claims. Its members include Jerry Yang of Yahoo; Carol C. Lam, general counsel at Qualcomm, Inc.; Jeffrey E. Stone, a senior partner at the international law firm McDermott Will & Emery, and James Coulter of the private equity giant TPG.
On Monday, trustee Felix Baker stepped down after allegations by The Stanford Daily of conflict of interest. Baker’s investment firm holds a $18 million stake in Denali Therapeutics, a biotechnology company co-founded by Tessier-Lavigne.
In previous instances of suspected scientific wrongdoing at Harvard, Johns Hopkins and other research campuses, it is typical for the institution to investigate itself. But some say that internal investigators may be tempted to sweep the issue under the rug.
“Standard playbook of academia. Don’t want to confirm misconduct by those in power? Simple. Appoint his/her friends to ‘investigate the matter,’ ” Tweeted Dr. Nancy Olivieri, a Toronto hematologist and science whistle-blower.
The Stanford committee would seek assistance from outside independent advisors, board chair Jerry Yang said in a statement on Friday.
As the committee works “with all deliberate speed,” said Yang, Tessier-Lavigne will continue to lead the campus.
“Since President Tessier-Lavigne’s appointment in 2016, he has effectively led this university with integrity and honor,” said Yang. “I am confident he will continue to do so while we undertake this review.”
Source: www.mercurynews.com