A paper plagiarizes an article retracted for plagiarism and other sins — but it isn’t being retracted.
原来，这不是一段绕口令。肆月壹零日，Cancer Chemotherapy and Pharmacology 发表了一条如上所示的关切表达，Expression of Concern:
The Editors-in-Chief would like to alert readers that there are some concerns related to this article [壹]. Concern has been raised that there are textual and formatting similarities to this retracted article[贰].
Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention has retracted the article titled “siRNA mediated silencing of NIN壹/RPN壹贰 binding protein 壹 homolog inhibits proliferation and growth of breast cance重庆卵子捐献r cells”(壹) for reason of similarity with a series of articles identified by Byrne and Labbé (贰).
换言之，这篇 被撤稿，是因为其与Byrne and Labbé发现的一系列问题论文存在相似。贰零壹柒年，Byrne and Labbé在Scientometrics 发表论文，披露了一系列关于某一基因敲除实验的中国论文存在引人注目的相似性。Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention这篇论文虽然没被Byrne and Labbé点名，但与被Byrne and Labbé点名的论文相似，因而被撤稿。
Byrne and Labbé的分析显示，相当多的论文存在相似错误，结果可靠性存疑：
We identified 肆捌 examples of highly similar papers describing single gene knockdowns in 壹–贰 human cancer cell lines that were all published by investigators from China. The incorrect use of a particular TPD伍贰L贰 shRNA sequence as a negative or non-targeting control was identified in 叁零/肆捌 (陆叁%) of these publications... Overall, these results suggest that some publications describing the effects of single gene knockdowns in human cancer cell lines may include the results of experiments that were not performed by the authors. This has serious implications for the validity of such results, and for their application in future research.