Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s drugs questioned due to fraudulent research
The drug controversy
Drugs for Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s are now coming under question as it has been revealed that the research underpinning their development was falsified. The companies and drugs affected include the following, as reported by Charles Pillar for Science:
- an experimental Parkinson’s therapy developed by Prothena
- dementia and stroke drug Cerebrolysin, produced by the Austrian-based biopharma company Ever Pharma, and distributed in many countries but which is not approved by the FDA and
- Neuropore Therapies, particularly minzasolmin, which is in early clinical trials
The Rise and Fall of a Research Luminary
Top-ranking scholar
The research in question is that of Eliezer Masliah, who the National Institute on Aging (NIA) hired in 2016 to head its Division of Neuroscience. Its $2.6 billion fiscal budget for the last year “dwarfs the rest of NIA combined,” Pillar reported. It was no mistake that Masliah was picked for this position as he had been involved in relevant research for decades and was considered a top-ranking scholar on Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s.
Masliah appeared an ideal selection. The physician and neuropathologist conducted research at the University of California San Diego (UCSD) for decades, and his drive, curiosity, and productivity propelled him into the top ranks of scholars on Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s disease. His roughly 800 research papers, many on how those conditions damage synapses, the junctions between neurons, have made him one of the most cited scientists in his field. His work on topics including alpha-synuclein—a protein linked to both diseases—continues to influence basic and clinical science.
Shocking allegations
Over the last two years, his work has come under scrutiny. A neuroscientist and forensic analysts who had previously worked with Science produced a 300-page dossier, which was not funded by Science, demonstrating that between 1997 and 2023, 132 of Masliah's published research papers had suspect images.
[S]cores of his lab studies at UCSD and NIA are riddled with apparently falsified Western blots—images used to show the presence of proteins—and micrographs [photograph or digital image taken through a microscope] of brain tissue. Numerous images seem to have been inappropriately reused within and across papers, sometimes published years apart in different journals, describing divergent experimental conditions.
Having reviewed his work, the investigative team concluded that a large amount of scientific work is now in question.
In our opinion, this pattern of anomalous data raises a credible concern for research misconduct and calls into question a remarkably large body of scientific work.
Eleven scientists who reviewed the dossier for Science were shocked by the findings, Pillar reported, believing that the identified problems could not be accidental.
Breathtaking,” says neuroscientist Christian Haass of the Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich. “People will, of course, be shocked, as I was. … I was falling from a chair, basically.”
He and the other researchers didn’t personally verify every example of possible misconduct, but they agreed that most of the suspect work cannot reasonably be explained as careless errors or publishing anomalies. “I’m floored,” says Samuel Gandy, a prominent neurologist at the Mount Sinai Alzheimer’s Disease Research Center who was visibly shaken during a video interview. “Hundreds of images. There had to have been ongoing manipulation for years.”
Gandy was disturbed, for example, that Masliah and colleagues seem to have used the same image of a mitochondrion, a cellular energy-producing structure, in two articles on different topics published 2 years apart in different journals. “The bus driver could see that they are identical,” Gandy says.
Masliah was the first or last author on every paper, indicating that most of the work was his or that he was primarily responsible for it, even though other scientists contributed to it.
MASLIAH IS THE SOLE common author on every paper in the dossier, usually taking the first or last position in multiauthor articles. Those positions imply he did the majority of the publication’s work or bears primary responsibility for it, although the others contributed.
Masliah, they believe, couldn’t have been misled by colleagues.
Several of the neuroscientists who reviewed the dossier say it seems implausible that Masliah was duped by a colleague. “Given the extended time frame and huge number of differing collaborators and co-authors on these papers, [possible misconduct] by a rogue postdoc or a collaborating scientist doesn’t apply here,” says Tim Greenamyre, director of the University of Pittsburgh Institute for Neurodegenerative Diseases. “I have a hard time believing that he didn’t know, whether he changed the images himself or somebody else did so on his behalf.”
Crémieux tweeted a chart included in Pillar’s article showing the impact Masliah’s articles had with subfields in which he was considered one of the top ten scientists highlighted in red.
Dr. Mu Yang, a neuroscientist and lead sleuth in the Eliezer Masliah case, tweeted about the concerns of Masliah’s co-authors.
Understandably people are freaking out about co-authorship with Eliezer Masliah. I went through his papers at least three times, and I will tell you that there are only two main con-artists other than Masliah himself.
Reset needed for Alzheimer's and Parkinson's research
Darren Incorvaia, covering Masliah’s potential scientific fraud for Fierce Biotech, spoke with Dr. Matthew Schrag, a neuroscientist at Vanderbilt University Medical Center who contributed to the dossier and said a reset is needed for both Alzheimer's and Parkinson's research.
These fields, both Alzheimer's and Parkinson's, need a reset. We need to look at this with an understanding that research integrity is a significant problem, and we need to come in and make sure that we are chasing the right targets and that we are universally committed to the well-being of our patients.
“Schrag’s investigative work,” Incorvaia noted, “is independent of his job at Vanderbilt University Medical Center.”
NIH investigated Masliah, removed him from his position
The NIH, the umbrella agency that includes the NIA (and which also encompasses NIAID, the agency that Anthony Fauci headed) conducted its own investigation, Incorviaia wrote.
The NIH has found evidence of research misconduct against Eliezer Masliah, M.D., the longtime head of the National Institute on Aging's (NIA) neuroscience division, the NIH said in a Sept. 26 statement.
The NIH only found two problematic papers.
The misconduct findings—made after a 9-month investigation by the agency—involve figures being reused and relabeled between two papers despite them representing different experimental conditions, according to the NIH.
“NIH will notify the two journals of its findings so that appropriate action can be taken,” the agency said in the statement. Masliah is not currently serving as the NIA’s neuroscience director, the agency added. . . .
The Broad Range of Scientific Fraud
Pharma fraud
Other instances of fraud cited by Fierce Biotech include:
◾ Flagship Pioneering’s Laronde — its research on a new class of genetic medicine was scrutinized in a Stat and Boston Globe investigation which revealed a “bad assay” and poor note-taking.
◾ Lykos Therapeutics — the FDA recently rejected a treatment application for its MDMA-assisted therapies [which uses the drug MDMA to help patients process trauma and emotional pain], after which the firm “had three papers retracted from scientific journals due to misconduct.” Lykos laid off 75% of its staff and eventually let go of CEO Amy Emerson.
◾ Cassava Biosciences — it has been accused of faking data related to Alzheimer's. “Schrag played a pivotal role in investigating publications underlying Cassava’s science, identifying dozens with problematic images. The company’s CEO and senior vice president of neuroscience both departed in July."
Fraud at Harvard
The Gold Report has previously covered the topic of scientific fraud, including data forgery perpetrated by research scientists with Harvard Medical School's Dana-Farber Cancer Institute (DFCI) and data manipulation in its business school.
Sholto David, a British scientist with a doctorate in cellular and molecular biology from Newcastle University . . . described by the New York Post as a “data sleuth,” made his accusations public with a January 2nd blog post naming DFCI's CEO Dr. Laurie Glimcher, COO Dr. William Hahn, Director of the Clinical Investigator Research Program Dr. Irene Ghobrial, and Jerome Lipper and Multiple Myeloma Center program director Dr. Kenneth Anderson in the alleged scandal.
. . .
According to David, images had been manipulated, and in some cases copied and pasted, in 57 published manuscripts. According to DFCI's Research Integrity Officer Barrett Rollins, as reported by The Harvard Crimson, the researchers have already retracted six papers with allegedly doctored images and will be correcting their work in 31 others.
. . .
In addition to the data manipulation by the four scientists and allegations of plagiarism by its president, Harvard Business School put professor Francesca Gino on administrative leave last year after it was alleged that she, too, falsified data. . .
In cases of academic fraud, The Gold Report noted, professors and scientists may be succumbing to the publish or perish motto of academic careers, while keeping the funders of the research sufficiently satifisfied to obtain future funding.
Emerging Alternatives
Those currently suffering from Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s, who may not be able to wait for the needed reset that Shrag mentioned, can explore nutritional and lifestyle therapies that have helped others recover from these illnesses. The Gold Report has written about Alzheimer's treatments in its article Alzheimer's treatment: Aducanumab vs. Bredesen Protocol and about options for Parkinson's patients in How eating meat may help reverse neurodegenerative diseases.
Far-reaching implications of scientific fraud
The research practices at the NIH, leading medical schools, academia, and pharmaceutical companies raise alarming questions about whether money and prestige are prioritized over integrity, ethics, and patient welfare.
The information contained in this article is for educational and information purposes only and is not intended as health, medical, financial or legal advice. Always consult a physician, lawyer or other qualified professional regarding any questions you may have about a medical condition, health objectives or legal or financial issues.
To learn more about the Masliah fraud:
- Data Fabrication Ousted NIA Neuroscience Director Eliezer Masliah
- Leading Neuroscientist Accused of Research Misconduct
Related articles:
- Prominent Harvard Medical School research scientists accused of 'data fraud'
- A welcome change: new medical journal commits to values of Honest Medicine™
- Claims of faked science are not fake news - researchers use AI, admit to falsifying data
- Global vaccine messianists - saviors or murderers? Part 1
- FDA under the influence – 6 things you should know about pharma and the FDA
