Since then, experts in the cancer field have spent the last eight years methodically re-creating the most important laboratory experiments in the area of cancer research. This team used mice and test tubes to conduct 50 trials, the type of study that leads to new cancer therapies. According to the results that were made public on Tuesday, we have: It was revealed that almost half of the scientific assertions were bogus.
A Large Number Of Cancer Tests Have Shown Equivocal Outcomes
Tests that can be duplicated with similar results are required for the most important findings to be made. There is little incentive for researchers to share their methods and data so that others may check their conclusions in the real world, says Marcia McNutt, president of the National Academy of Sciences. According to her, researchers lose their credibility if their results cannot be verified. The incentives for publicizing new developments are also built-in.
According to Prasad, however, reading the headlines of a mouse study that appears to promise a cure is just around the way that may give cancer patients false optimism. In cancer research, progress is usually slower than we would want. In the present study, the emphasis is on defects that were detected early in the scientific process rather than on difficulties with existing remedies. To guarantee that cancer drugs are safe and effective, they undergo thorough testing in large numbers of people before they are put on the market.
Replicating tests from cancer biology studies published in high-profile journals such as Cell, Science, and Nature between 2010 and 2012 was necessary to complete the research. On Tuesday, an investigation published by eLife found 54 percent of the original findings failed to fulfill statistical criteria specified in advance by the Reproducibility Project. According to the institute’s website, the Howard Hughes Medical Institute, which also funds The Associated Press Health and Science Department, supports a life.
When research claimed to have connected colon cancer to a certain kind of gut bacteria, it eventually turned out that this was untrue. Another was for a drug that decreased the growth of breast tumors in mice. In a third study, a potential treatment for prostate cancer was tested on mice. According to a study coauthor, prostate cancer research conducted at Sanford Burnham Prebys has been able to withstand a variety of tests and evaluations.
The Reproducibility Project has completed an examination into the issue of reproducibility. Similar concerns were found in 2015 when they sought to duplicate experiments in psychology, as they were in 2015. Researcher Brian Nosek, a coauthor of a recent study published in the journal PLOS One, believes that more research is needed to verify the findings. The researchers made an effort to minimize the disparities in cancer studies. Their questions regarding which strain of mice they should use or where to get tumor cells were often met with a lack of support from specialists who had done the original study. To boost data sharing among scientists, the National Institutions of Health plans to begin requiring grant-funded institutes to do so starting in 2023, says Lauer.