To provide additional context (the NYT article is fine, but doesn't give a sense of the technical issues with the study, or of how difficult/impossible it was to bring attention to those issues; the behavior of Duke seems particularly scandalous)...<p>If you have a few minutes, Baggerly's talk---on the "forensic bioinformatics" undertaken to pinpoint the study's flaws---is fascinating:<p><a href="http://videolectures.net/cancerbioinformatics2010_baggerly_irrh/" rel="nofollow">http://videolectures.net/cancerbioinformatics2010_baggerly_i...</a><p>The associated paper:<p><a href="http://arxiv.org/abs/1010.1092" rel="nofollow">http://arxiv.org/abs/1010.1092</a><p>Recent small steps toward preventing similar problems in the future:<p><a href="https://groups.google.com/d/topic/reproducible-research/UipZDnkFBt0/discussion" rel="nofollow">https://groups.google.com/d/topic/reproducible-research/UipZ...</a>