Talk:Cassava Sciences/Primary sources
Primary source journal papers
Used at Cassava Sciences, simufilam and Lindsay Burns:
| ISO Pub date |
PMID | Authors | Journal | Article name | Status (with PMID re Erratum or Expression of concern) |
Ind ref |
Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2005 | PMID 16084657
|
Wang HY, Friedman E, Olmstead MC, Burns LH | Neuroscience | Ultra-low-dose naloxone suppresses opioid tolerance, dependence and associated changes in mu opioid receptor-G protein coupling and Gbetagamma signaling | 2022-02-01 | [1][2] | Cassava related but opioid receptor signaling; FLNA not yet identified. Editor issued editorial note stating "no evidence of data manipulation." There are at least 5 other (non-Cassava Wang papers cleared by editors that are not on this list. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SighSci (talk • contribs) 16:35, August 26, 2022 (UTC) Without naming them explicitly, the WSJ refers to all Cassava articles co-authored by Wang. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:53, 31 August 2022 (UTC) |
| 2009-09-02 | PMID 19726654
|
Wang HY, Stucky A, Liu J, Shen C, Trocme-Thibierge C, Morain P | The Journal of Neuroscience | Dissociating β-Amyloid from α7 Nicotinic Acetylcholine Receptor by a Novel Therapeutic Agent, S 24795, Normalizes α7 Nicotinic Acetylcholine and NMDA Receptor Function in Alzheimer's Disease Brain | 2022-01-19 Expression of concern PMID 34921049
|
[3][4] | Nothing to do with Cassava (this is a Servier paper). As with the other JNS paper, the editor cleared but is keeping an expression of concern until CUNY is complete. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SighSci (talk • contribs) 20:42, August 24, 2022 (UTC) "In response to the allegations, in December The Journal of Neuroscience published 'expressions of concern' regarding two brain studies authored by the company's chief collaborator, Hoau-Yan Wang, a professor at the City University of New York. One was co-written by Lindsay H. Burns, chief scientist at Cassava. The journal editors also noted errors in the images accompanying the latter study. ... Both [The Journal of Neurocience and Neurobiology of Aging] said they would wait to take further action pending an investigation by Dr. Wang's employer, CUNY."[3] |
| 2012-07-18 | PMID 22815492
|
Wang HY, Bakshi K, Frankfurt M, Stucky A, Goberdhan M, Shah SM, Burns LH | The Journal of Neuroscience | Reducing Amyloid-Related Alzheimer's Disease Pathogenesis by a Small Molecule Targeting Filamin A | 2020-12-15 Erratum PMID 34921050
|
[3][4][1] | This is the first and only foundational paper for simufilam; editor stated "no evidence of data manipulation" but issued a subsequent expression of concern because CUNY investigation is still ongoing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SighSci (talk • contribs) 20:42, August 24, 2022 (UTC) See note at PMID 19726654. The WSJ article mentions this paper, but does not reference it by name, so one has to google and rely on a Cassava press release to figure out which paper the WSJ is referring to. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:51, 31 August 2022 (UTC) |
| 2017-05-19 | PMID 28438486
|
Wang HY, Lee KC, Pei Z, Khan A, Bakshi K, Burns LH | Neurobiology of Aging | PTI-125 binds and reverses an altered conformation of filamin A to reduce Alzheimer's disease pathogenesis | 2022-05 Expression of concern [2] | [3][1] | This is the second of three simufilam papers, expanding on the 2012 JNS paper to show an altered conformation and cognitive effects in mice. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SighSci (talk • contribs) 20:42, August 24, 2022 (UTC) "In March, the journal Neurobiology of Aging attached an expression of concern to another publication about Alzheimer's authored by Dr. Wang and Dr. Burns, among others, that has been key to the company's treatment hypothesis. ... The editors 'did not find compelling evidence of data manipulation intended to misrepresent the results,' but went on to list a variety of methodological errors. Both [The Journal of Neurocience and Neurobiology of Aging] said they would wait to take further action pending an investigation by Dr. Wang's employer, CUNY."[3] Without naming them explicitly, the WSJ refers to all Cassava articles co-authored by Wang. |
| 2017-07-27 | PMID 28750690
|
Wang HY, Trocmé-Thibierge C, Stucky A, Shah SM, Kvasic J, Khan A, Morain P, Guignot I, Bouguen E, Deschet K, Pueyo M, Mocaer E, Ousset PJ, Vellas B, Kiyasova V | Alzheimer's Research & Therapy | Increased Aβ 42-α7-like nicotinic acetylcholine receptor complex level in lymphocytes is associated with apolipoprotein E4-driven Alzheimer's disease pathogenesis | 2022-07-01 Retraction PMID 35650632
|
Nothing to do with Cassava, but another Servier paper. Servier can confirm that Wang was and still is blind to group, making it impossible for him to manipulate data for any outcome. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SighSci (talk • contribs) 20:42, August 24, 2022 (UTC) | |
| 2020-02-07 | PMID 32920628
|
Wang HY, Pei Z, Lee KC, Lopez-Brignoni E, Nikolov B, Crowley CA, Marsman MR, Barbier R, Friedmann N, Burns LH | Journal of Prevention of Alzheimer's Disease | PTI-125 Reduces Biomarkers of Alzheimer’s Disease in Patients | None. | [1] | This is the third simufilam publication. Editors found "no convincing evidence of data manipulation" per press release only. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SighSci (talk • contribs) 20:42, August 24, 2022 (UTC) Without naming them explicitly, the WSJ refers to all Cassava articles co-authored by Wang. |
| 2021-04-16 | PMID 33863362
|
Wang S, Li B, Solomon V, Fonteh A, Rapoport SI, Bennett DA, Arvanitakis Z, Chui HC, Miller C, Sullivan PM, Wang HY, Yassine HN | Molecular Neurodegeneration | Calcium-dependent cytosolic phospholipase A2 activation is implicated in neuroinflammation and oxidative stress associated with ApoE4 | 2022-02-04 Retraction PMID 35115039
|
Nothing to do with Cassava. Importantly, a different co-author (Yassine) independently repeated the experiment done in Wang's lab and confirmed the same result and conclusions. It was republished in June 2022 under the same title, but Wang was unjustly removed from the author list. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SighSci (talk • contribs) 20:42, August 24, 2022 (UTC) | |
| 2008-02-6 | PMID 18253501
|
Wang HY, Frankfurt M, Burns LH | PLoS ONE
|
High-Affinity Naloxone Binding to Filamin A Prevents Mu Opioid Receptor–Gs Coupling Underlying Opioid Tolerance and Dependence | 2022-03-30 Retraction PMID 35353861
|
[3][5] | This paper is not about Alzheimer's or simufilam, even though the FLNA target was first identified as important for opioid receptor signaling. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SighSci (talk • contribs) 20:42, August 24, 2022 (UTC) "On March 30, another scientific journal, PLoS One, retracted five papers by Dr. Wang after a five-month investigation into 'serious concerns about the integrity and reliability of the results,' according to a spokesman for the journal. Two of the papers, co-written by Dr. Burns, were about a brain protein targeted by Cassava's drug."[3] |
| 2009-01-07 | PMID 19172190
|
Wang HY, Burns LH | PLoS ONE
|
Naloxone's Pentapeptide Binding Site on Filamin A Blocks Mu Opioid Receptor–Gs Coupling and CREB Activation of Acute Morphine | 2022-03-30 Retraction PMID 35353864
|
[3][5] | This paper is not about Alzheimer's or simufilam, even though the FLNA target was first identified as important for opioid receptor signaling. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SighSci (talk • contribs) 20:42, August 24, 2022 (UTC) See note at PMID 18253501 |
| 2011-09-27 | PMID 21980374
|
Bakshi K, Kosciuk M, Nagele RG, Friedman E, Wang HY | PLoS ONE
|
Prenatal cocaine exposure increases synaptic localization of a neuronal RasGEF, GRASP-1 via hyperphosphorylation of AMPAR anchoring protein, GRIP | 2022-03-30 Retraction PMID 35353867
|
[3][5] | Nothing to do with Cassava. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SighSci (talk • contribs) 20:42, August 24, 2022 (UTC) See note at PMID 18253501 |
| 2014-03-13 | PMID 24626340
|
Bakshi K, Parihar R, Goswami SK, Walsh M, Friedman E, Wang HY | PLoS ONE
|
Prenatal cocaine exposure uncouples mGluR1 from Homer1 and Gq Proteins | 2022-03-30 Retraction PMID 35353866
|
[3][5] | Nothing to do with Cassava — Preceding unsigned comment added by SighSci (talk • contribs) 20:42, August 24, 2022 (UTC) See note at PMID 18253501 |
| 2016-08-05 | PMID 27494324
|
Stucky A, Bakshi KP, Friedman E, Wang HY | PLoS ONE
|
Prenatal Cocaine Exposure Upregulates BDNF-TrkB Signaling | 2022-03-30 Retraction PMID 35353858
|
[3][5] | Nothing to do with Cassava. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SighSci (talk • contribs) 20:42, August 24, 2022 (UTC) See note at PMID 18253501 |
| 2012-04 | PMID 22476197
|
Talbot K, Wang HY, Kazi H, Han LY, Bakshi KP, Stucky A, Fuino RL, Kawaguchi KR, Samoyedny AJ, Wilson RS, Arvanitakis Z, Schneider JA, Wolf BA, Bennett DA, Trojanowski JQ, Arnold SE | Journal of Clinical Investigation | Demonstrated brain insulin resistance in Alzheimer's disease patients is associated with IGF-1 resistance, IRS-1 dysregulation, and cognitive decline | None | [2] | "The most influential Cassava-related paper appeared in The Journal of Clinical Investigation in 2012. The authors—including Wang; Arnold; ... — linked insulin resistance to Alzheimer’s and the formation of amyloid plaques. Cassava scientists say Simufilam lessens insulin resistance. They relied on a method in which dead brain tissue, frozen for a decade and then partially thawed and chopped, purportedly generates chemical signals. ... That paper supported the science behind Simufilam, Schrag says, “and spawned an entire field of research in Alzheimer’s, ‘diabetes of the brain.’” It has been cited more than 1500 times. Schrag sent the journal’s editor his analysis of more than 15 suspect images. In an email that Schrag provided to Science, the editor said the journal had reviewed high-resolution versions of the images when they were originally submitted and declined to consider Schrag’s findings." |
Secondary (independent) references
References
- ^ ISSN 0099-9660. Retrieved April 29, 2022.
- ^ S2CID 250953611. Archived from the originalon August 28, 2022.
- ^ ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved April 28, 2022.
- ^ a b The NYT refers to Retraction Watch https://retractionwatch.com/2021/12/20/two-expressions-of-concern-arrive-for-papers-linked-to-beleaguered-biotech-cassava/ which refers to The WSJ.
- ^ a b c d e The NYT references Retraction Watch https://retractionwatch.com/2022/03/30/five-studies-linked-to-cassava-biosciences-retracted/#more-124589
Discussion, comments and queries
Alexbrn and Smartse
. My concern is how much you have stalled my efforts to improve the article. I still have much work to do to sort the various journal papers before I can start writing at the Wikipedia articles, but two points for now:
- Please review WP:SYNTH. If reliable sources don't draw a conclusion, we can't. But when reliable sources do explictly connect papers to the Cassava issue, so can we. You have in several places on the table indicated "no connection" to Cassava, when reliable sources quite explicitly make the connection.
- Under PMID 16084657, you stated that "There are at least 5 other (non-Cassava Wang papers cleared by editors that are not on this list." This is another instance of a failure to understand WP:OR, which it does not seem you have read. If no secondary sources mention those studies, neither will we. If you have independent, secondary sources (not churnalismand press releases), please list those.
At this point, I'd prefer you not edit the table directly (that's why I provided this section for discussion from the get-go), as I am now having to (again) sort the attempt to sort (second-level frustration). I want to know which journal article is which as referenced by secondary sources, and what those secondary sources say about them. I am still filling that in, having completed only the Mandavilli NYT piece. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:13, 31 August 2022 (UTC)
- I saw that intent but also saw the column labeled comments. I will not edit. So, the Science article -- a reliable source -- mentioned "34 Cassava-related papers" simply because they are authored by Dr. Wang, an advisor. I do not think that WSJ was using the same loose definition, when some of them actually are Cassava related. Dr. Wang has done work for other companies and with other academic collaborators, so it is not correct to call, for example, the work he has done for Servier "Cassava-related," or his collaborations with Loma Linda and MGH "Cassava-related," but that is in fact what Piller has done, especially with "the most influential Cassava-related paper." Of course Piller did not mention that the vast majority of these flagged papers have been cleared by their editors. I do not know of any other secondary sources mentioning these papers in this table. SighSci (talk) 22:54, 31 August 2022 (UTC)
- Piller is not mentioned on this page; I cannot decipher to what you are referring. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:32, 1 September 2022 (UTC)
- I have now added Piller. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 10:20, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
- Piller is not mentioned on this page; I cannot decipher to what you are referring. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:32, 1 September 2022 (UTC)