Esophageal squamous cell carcinomas in a Malaysian cohort show a lack of association with human papillomavirus.

OBJECTIVE: With an age-standardized incidence rate of 2 per 100 000, esophageal cancer is not common among Malaysians, but they are nevertheless important due to its poor prognosis. The study is to clarify whether the human papillomavirus (HPV) is associated with esophageal cancer in Malaysians as there has been no report to date on this in Malaysians and other South East Asians. METHODS: Altogether 67 esophageal squamous cell carcinomas histologically diagnosed between 1 January 2004 and 31 December 2014 at the Department of Pathology, University of Malaya Medical Center, Malaysia were considered for HPV analysis using two commercially available methods, polymerase chain reaction with flow-through hybridization (21 HPV GenoArray Diagnostic Kit) and multiplex real-time polymerase chain reaction (Anyplex II HPV28 Detection). The DNA amplifiability of the formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tumor was checked by amplification of a 268 bp segment of the human ß-globin gene (GH20/PC04) prior to HPV detection. RESULTS: HPV detection was finally carried out in 51 patients. HPV16 was detected in the moderately differentiated, stage IV lower esophageal tumor of a 32-year-old Malaysian-born Chinese woman by both methods. Except for a predilection for Indians, the clinical characteristics of esophageal squamous cell carcinomas in this Malaysian cohort were generally similar to those of other populations. CONCLUSION: It appears that HPV is rare and an unlikely oncovirus in esophageal squamous cell carcinomas of Malaysians.

Scientific misconduct encountered by APAME journals: an online survey.

In June 2015, invitations were sent by email to 151 APAME journals to participate in an online survey with an objective of gaining insight into the common publication misconduct encountered by APAME editors. The survey, conducted through SurveyMonkey over a 20-day-period, comprised 10 questions with expansions to allow anecdotes limited to 400 characters, estimated to take less than 10 minutes to complete. Only one invitation was issued per journal, targeting (in order of priority) editors, editorial board members and editorial staff, and limited by email availability. 54 (36%) journals responded. 98% of respondents held Editor or Editorial Board positions. All respondent journals have editorial policies on publication ethics and 96% provide instructions related to ethics. 45% use anti-plagiarism software to screen manuscripts, the most popular being iThenticate, CrossCheck and Turnitin. Up to 50% of journals had encountered studies without IRB approval. Author misconduct encountered were (in rank order): plagiarism (75%), duplicate publication (58%), unjustified authorship (39%), authorship disputes (33%), data falsification (29%), data/image manipulation (27%), conflict of interest (25%), copyright violation (17%) and breach of confidentiality (10%). Reviewer misconduct encountered were: conflict of interest (19%), plagiarism (17%), obstructive behavior (17%), abusive language (13%) and breach of confidentiality (13%). Notwithstanding the limitations of the survey and the response rate, a few insights have been gained: (1) the need for strengthening the ethical culture of researchers/authors and reviewers, (2) anti-plagiarism software can improve plagiarism detection by about 15%, and (3) the need for technical support to detect plagiarism, duplicate publication and image manipulation.