◇◇新语丝(www.xys.org)(xys7.dxiong.com)(xys.ebookdiy.com)(xys2.dropin.org)◇◇

　　传闻困扰葛兰素史克中国

　　《自然》2013年6月6日

　　中国网络被一个传闻刺激着，葛兰素史克(GSK)中国研发中心的头因涉及科
学造假被调查。

　　5月31日，科学监督网站新语丝以“formergskemployees”名义匿名发表这
个消息后，它就传开了。

　　该匿名帖指控2010年发表在《自然·医学》上的一篇论文有假。这篇论文的
作者之一是葛兰素史克中国区高级副总裁和自身免疫病方面的专家臧敬五。

　　该论文声称，通过研究小鼠疾病模型和来自多发性硬化病人的血液样品，一
种细胞受体——白细胞介素-7受体(IL-7R)在该疾病中起着关键作用。

　　匿名帖的指控包括其描述抑制病人样品中的病态IL-7R作用的样品实际上是
来自健康人的，并且原始实验记录与论文文字矛盾。

　　其他科学家试图重复其结果，但没能成功。一项研究指出：“我们使用EAE
小鼠试验抑制IL-7Rα的抗体的疗效的结果与臧的研究小组的研究结果大体上是
一致的。然而，我们对机理的详细研究产生的结果却与他们的发现非常的不同。”
该论文补充说：“这些矛盾的观察结果……不太可能是由于实验步骤的差异，因
为我们细心地遵循他们的方法。”

　　GSK全球外联主任David Daley告诉《自然》：“我们正在对一些涉及一篇科
学论文的指控进行内部调查，但是此时我没有更多的细节。让我们评价一个正在
进行的调查是不合适的。研究诚实性对我们的工作至关重要，我们正尽我们所能
全面地调查这些事。”

　　《自然·医学》主编Juan Carlos Lopez说：“GSK正在进行内部调查。我们
预计在接下来的几天内会收到结果。”Lopez否认《自然·医学》派员工参与调
查的传闻。

　　该论文列出的作者贡献称臧“设计和讨论研究”、“参与论文写作”和“主
管研究项目”，但是没有参与实际的实验。

　　新语丝上的帖子称臧已离开GSK。上海研发中心的一名代表确认臧“暂时离
职”。记者试图通过其助理联系臧，但没能成功。发送到臧的GSK帐号的电子邮
件被弹回。

　　新语丝是以揭露科学家造假出名的网站（参见“一把锤子击向全国道德”和
“约翰·马多克斯奖表彰捍卫科学的勇气”）。管理新语丝网站的方是民说他对
该事件所知甚少，除了匿名指控臧敬五的张贴说到的那些。“几天前GSK的一个
前雇员寄给我一篇文章披露该调查结果，我在5月31日将它贴在新语丝网站上。”

　　GSK进入中国时保证要改变那里的医药研发方式。它在2007年建立其上海中
心时，计划大干一场，雇佣了1000人。多数其他西方制药公司在中国的投资较少，
只把临床试验前的阶段的研究外包给中国部门，但GSK让其中国部门完全自主，
并让其全权负责从研究到临床试验的药物研发。

　　NEWS
　　Disturbing rumours embroil GSK China
　　David Cyranoski
　　06 June 2013
　　The Chinese blogosphere is afire over a rumour that the head of 
the Chinese R&D unit for GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) is under investigation 
for scientific fraud.
　　The story has circulated widely since it was published anonymously, 
under the authorship of “formergskemployees”, on a science watchdog 
website, New Threads, on 31 May.
　　The anonymous poster alleges that a 2010 paper published in Nature 
Medicine1 was fraudulent. The paper was authored by Jingwu Zang, 
senior vice-president of GSK R&D China and an expert in autoimmune 
disease.
　　The paper claims to show the crucial role of a certain cell 
receptor — the interleukin-7 receptor (IL-7R) — in multiple 
sclerosis (MS) using a mouse model of the disease and blood samples 
from MS patients.
　　The allegations in the anonymous post include a claim that data 
said to describe the effect of blocking the pathogenic IL-7R in 
patient samples actually used blood samples from healthy subjects and 
points to a discrepancy on that point between the original laboratory 
records data and the text in the paper. 
　　Other scientists have tried and failed to replicate the results. 
One study2 states: “Our results on the therapeutic efficacy of IL-7R
α–blocking antibody in EAE mice are largely consistent with the 
study by [zang’s group]. Our detailed mechanistic studies, however, 
have yielded results that are quite different from their findings.” 
The paper adds: “The conflicting observations … were not likely due 
to differences in the experimental protocols, because we diligently 
followed their methods.”
　　GSK's global external communications director, David Daley, told 
Nature: “We are carrying out an internal investigation into some 
alleged issues related to a scientific paper but I don’t have further 
details at the moment. It wouldn’t be appropriate for us to comment 
on particular aspects of an investigation while it is ongoing. The 
integrity of our research is critical to our work and we are doing 
whatever is required to investigate these matters fully.”
　　Nature Medicine's editor-in-chief Juan Carlos Lopez says: “There 
is an ongoing internal investigation at GSK. We expect to receive the 
results within the next few days.” Lopez denies rumours that Nature 
Medicine had sent staff to be part of the investigation.
　　The paper’s list of author contributions says that Zang 
“designed and discussed the study”, “contributed to the writing of 
the paper” and “supervised the project” but was not involved in 
conducting the actual experimental procedures. 
　　The post on New Threads says that Zang has left the company. A 
representative at the Shanghai-based R&D research unit confirmed that 
Zang was on “temporarily on leave”. Attempts to reach him through 
his personal assistant were unsuccessful, and e-mails to his GSK 
account bounced back.
　　New Threads is a website famous for its role in debunking 
fraudulent scientists (see ' A hammer blow to national ethics ' and ' 
Courage for sound science wins John Maddox Prize '). Shi-Min Fang, who 
runs the New Threads website, says he knows little about the case, 
other than what was alleged in the anonymous post. “Several days ago, 
a former employee of GSK sent me an article disclosing the results of 
the investigation, and I posted it on our New Threads website on 31 
May.”
　　GSK entered China promising to change the way pharmaceutical 
research and development was done there. It planned to create a 
massive presence — with 1,000 employees — when it opened its 
Shanghai doors in 2007. Whereas most other Western pharmaceutical 
companies made smaller investments in China and outsourced only 
certain stages of preclinical development to Chinese units, GSK made 
its Chinese unit wholly autonomous and gave it full responsibility for 
developing drugs, from basic research to clinical trials, for 
neurodegenerative disease (see ' Pharmaceutical futures: Made in China? 
').
　　References

　　1.Liu, X. et al. Nature Med. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nm.2077 
(2010). 
　　2.Lee, F.-L. et al. Sci. Transl. Med. 
http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/scitranslmed.3002400 (2011). 
　　Related links

　　Journal title:Nature NewsDate published:(06 June 
2013)doi:10.1038/nature.2013.13154

(XYS20130610)

◇◇新语丝(www.xys.org)(xys7.dxiong.com)(xys.ebookdiy.com)(xys2.dropin.org)◇◇