This paper is marked retracted in the scholarly record (OpenAlex). Interpret its findings with caution.
Retraction Note: The oncogenic Golgi phosphoprotein 3 like overexpression is associated with cisplatin resistance in ovarian carcinoma and activating the NF-κB signaling pathway
Shanyang He, Gang Niu, Jianhong Shang, Yalan Deng, Zhiyong Wan, Cai Zhang, Zeshan You, Hongwei Shen
Abstract
Genes, proteins, chemicals, diseases, species, mutations and cell lines named across the full text — each resolved to its canonical identifier and authoritative record.
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsKruppel-like factors research · Cancer, Lipids, and Metabolism · Peroxisome Proliferator-Activated Receptors
Retraction Note **: ** J Exp Clin Cancer Res 36, 137 (2017)
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13046-017-0607-0
The Editor-in-Chief has retracted this article. Several image integrity concerns were brought to the attention of the publisher after publication, including:
- In figure 2B, FASC scatter plots appear to contain duplications between the GOLPH3L sh#1 SKOV3, GOLPH3L sh#2 SKOV3 and GOLPH3L sh#2 A2780 plots
- In figure 3F, the top of image A2780 vector-Active Caspase 3 appears to contain overlap with the bottom of A2780 GOLPH3L- Active Caspase 3
- In figure 4E, there appear to be high similarities between panel α-Tubulin - SKOV3 - control/GOLPH3L-2h#1- control/GOLPH3L-2h#2 and figure 5A α-Tubulin in another article published earlier by different authors [1].
The authors were not able to provide a satisfactory explanation for these concerns and described repeated issues with data labelling and storage practices. Therefore the Editor has lost confidence in the data and conclusions of this article.
Author Shengyang He disagrees with this retraction. All other authors have not responded to correspondence regarding this retraction.