In August, NIH asked federally funded research institutes to investigate potential violations of granting agency policies, after finding possible conflicts with five MD Anderson faculty members
By Jessica Davis
April 22, 2019 - Houston-based MD Anderson Cancer Center recently ousted three scientists due to concerns about their Chinese ties, given reports that China is attempting to steal U.S. research data, according to local news outlet The Houston Chronicle.
The move is the first reported incident since federal officials have asked federally funded research institutes to investigate potential violations of granting agency policies. For MD Anderson, the actions come after it received letters from the National Institutes of Health that outlined potential conflicts of interests or unreported foreign income of five faculty members.
At the time, NIH officials said they would work with other government agencies, industry stakeholders, and NIH-funded academic institutions to “improve accurate reporting of all sources of research support, financial interests, and affiliations; mitigate the risk to intellectual property security while continuing NIH’s long tradition of collaborations, including with foreign scientists and institutions; and explore additional steps to protect the integrity of peer review.”
NIH, assisted by the FBI, gave MD Anderson 30 days to respond. An official told the Chronicle that NIH would have been able to withhold funding from the cancer center, if they failed to take action. NIH granted MD Anderson $148 million in 2018.
For three of the identified researchers, MD Anderson started the termination process. Two of the three researchers resigned, while the other has just begun the due process requirements. For the remaining two in question, MD Anderson determined termination was not warranted for one, while the other is still under investigation. At least three of the researchers are Chinese.
Officials stressed that no patient information was accessed or shared.
In a recent announcement addressing the threat of foreign influence, MD Anderson did not outline the firing of the researchers. But officials explained efforts the cancer center is taking to address security concerns posed by foreign influence in three areas: “diversion of intellectual property, sharing of confidential information on grant applications and failure by some researchers to disclose substantial resources from outside organizations.”
MD Anderson officials noted that they have been impacted by this risk and are taking action to address concerns. To start, officials developed an enterprise risk management approach and increased efforts to bolster awareness and education around data security. They’re also prioritizing and strengthening the management of potential conflicts of interest.
“MD Anderson remains committed to the highest levels of scientific integrity, public accountability, and social responsibility in the conduct of science,” MD Anderson President Peter Pisters, MD, said in a statement. “We do so with an unending focus on ethics, our core value of Integrity, and a shared commitment to maintain the extraordinary levels of trust the public has placed in us.”
“We have an obligation to do all we can to protect our intellectual property and all state and federal resources entrusted to us,” he added. “We must be vigilant in protecting the outstanding work of our faculty and ensuring our continued ability to conduct world-class research in our pursuit to end cancer.”
The NIH findings around foreign influence share hallmarks with a February US-China Economic and Security Review Commission report that found China could use medical data for blackmail, as the country has been heavily investing in US biotechnology – including genomic data.
By Jessica Davis
April 22, 2019 - Houston-based MD Anderson Cancer Center recently ousted three scientists due to concerns about their Chinese ties, given reports that China is attempting to steal U.S. research data, according to local news outlet The Houston Chronicle.
The move is the first reported incident since federal officials have asked federally funded research institutes to investigate potential violations of granting agency policies. For MD Anderson, the actions come after it received letters from the National Institutes of Health that outlined potential conflicts of interests or unreported foreign income of five faculty members.
At the time, NIH officials said they would work with other government agencies, industry stakeholders, and NIH-funded academic institutions to “improve accurate reporting of all sources of research support, financial interests, and affiliations; mitigate the risk to intellectual property security while continuing NIH’s long tradition of collaborations, including with foreign scientists and institutions; and explore additional steps to protect the integrity of peer review.”
NIH, assisted by the FBI, gave MD Anderson 30 days to respond. An official told the Chronicle that NIH would have been able to withhold funding from the cancer center, if they failed to take action. NIH granted MD Anderson $148 million in 2018.
For three of the identified researchers, MD Anderson started the termination process. Two of the three researchers resigned, while the other has just begun the due process requirements. For the remaining two in question, MD Anderson determined termination was not warranted for one, while the other is still under investigation. At least three of the researchers are Chinese.
Officials stressed that no patient information was accessed or shared.
In a recent announcement addressing the threat of foreign influence, MD Anderson did not outline the firing of the researchers. But officials explained efforts the cancer center is taking to address security concerns posed by foreign influence in three areas: “diversion of intellectual property, sharing of confidential information on grant applications and failure by some researchers to disclose substantial resources from outside organizations.”
MD Anderson officials noted that they have been impacted by this risk and are taking action to address concerns. To start, officials developed an enterprise risk management approach and increased efforts to bolster awareness and education around data security. They’re also prioritizing and strengthening the management of potential conflicts of interest.
“MD Anderson remains committed to the highest levels of scientific integrity, public accountability, and social responsibility in the conduct of science,” MD Anderson President Peter Pisters, MD, said in a statement. “We do so with an unending focus on ethics, our core value of Integrity, and a shared commitment to maintain the extraordinary levels of trust the public has placed in us.”
“We have an obligation to do all we can to protect our intellectual property and all state and federal resources entrusted to us,” he added. “We must be vigilant in protecting the outstanding work of our faculty and ensuring our continued ability to conduct world-class research in our pursuit to end cancer.”
The NIH findings around foreign influence share hallmarks with a February US-China Economic and Security Review Commission report that found China could use medical data for blackmail, as the country has been heavily investing in US biotechnology – including genomic data.
