Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Anil Potti

Anil Potti is an Indian-born and former of at School of Medicine, best known for his work in oncogenomics and for a high-profile case of that resulted in the fabrication of data used in and clinical trials. Born in , Potti earned a Bachelor of and Surgery degree from the Christian Medical College and in . He completed training in at the University of North Dakota's Fargo campus and later served as an there before joining in 2003 as a researcher in the lab of Joseph Nevins. At Duke, Potti focused on developing personalized cancer therapies based on profiles from tumor samples, claiming to create algorithms that could predict patient responses to with high accuracy. Potti's , published in prominent journals, promised to revolutionize by enabling tailored treatments for and other cancers, leading to clinical trials that enrolled over 100 patients between 2007 and 2010. However, investigations beginning in 2010 revealed that Potti had falsely claimed credentials, such as being a Rhodes Scholar, on grant applications and professional profiles, prompting to place him on . Further scrutiny uncovered intentional falsification of data in at least 11 published papers, including fabricated genomic signatures and misrepresented patient outcomes, which undermined the validity of the trials and exposed patients to ineffective or potentially harmful treatments. In 2015, the U.S. Office of Integrity (ORI) formally found Potti guilty of , resulting in the retraction of 11 articles, to six others, and his debarment from federal funding for five years. The scandal, one of the most significant in U.S. biomedical research history, led Duke University to settle lawsuits with affected patients in 2015 and prompted broader discussions on research integrity, data reproducibility, and institutional oversight in oncology. Following his departure from Duke in 2012, Potti subsequently worked as a clinician at a cancer center in North Dakota, where he continued practice after the debarment ended in 2020 amid ongoing scrutiny of the scandal, which resurfaced in 2025 media discussions on research integrity. As of 2025, reflections on the case continue to highlight its lasting impact on trust in personalized medicine and the need for rigorous validation of AI-assisted diagnostic tools in cancer care.

Early Life and Education

Medical Training in India

Anil Potti was born in 1972 in , . He completed his early education in the region before pursuing medical studies at the Christian Medical College () in , , a renowned institution established in 1900 and affiliated with Tamil Nadu Dr. M.G.R. Medical University. Potti enrolled in the MBBS program at , which spans 5.5 years and combines rigorous academic coursework with hands-on clinical training. The curriculum emphasizes comprehensive medical knowledge, ethical practice, and patient care in a resource-limited setting, preparing graduates for diverse healthcare challenges in . In 1995, he earned his Bachelor of Medicine and Bachelor of Surgery (MBBS) degree from . The MBBS program at culminates in a mandatory one-year rotating at the affiliated Christian Medical College Hospital, where students rotate through departments such as general medicine, , , and to build foundational clinical skills. This , integral to the degree, provided practical training in patient management and diagnostics. Following the completion of his and in , Potti transitioned to the for advanced postgraduate training.

Postgraduate Work at Duke University

Following his medical training in India, Anil Potti pursued advanced postgraduate education in the United States, arriving at in 2003 to commence his medical oncology fellowship. This opportunity built on his prior completion of an internal medicine residency at the School of Medicine and Health Sciences, which he finished before transitioning to Duke. At , Potti completed his medical fellowship by 2006, marking the end of his formal clinical training. During this period, he became involved in research activities within the institution's robust biomedical environment. In 2004, he joined the laboratory of Joseph Nevins, a prominent researcher in cancer , where he began contributing to early-stage investigative work under mentorship. Shortly after finishing his fellowship in , was appointed as an instructor in the Department of Medicine at School of Medicine, transitioning into a role that bridged clinical practice and research. This appointment positioned him at the intersection of training and emerging genomic studies, laying the groundwork for his subsequent academic pursuits.

Professional Career

Research Role at Duke

Following his postgraduate training in hematology-oncology at , Anil Potti transitioned to a faculty role there, building on his clinical and research experience in cancer . In 2007, Potti was appointed as an of in the Department of Medicine and the Institute for Genome Sciences and Policy (IGSP) at Duke University School of Medicine. In this capacity, he established and led an independent oncogenomics laboratory within the Center for Applied Genomics and Technology (CAGT), focusing on signatures to predict cancer outcomes and personalize treatments. His lab collaborated closely with senior researchers, including Joseph Nevins, on projects analyzing genomic data from tumor samples to identify patterns associated with disease progression and therapeutic response in cancers such as and . Potti's early successes at included securing competitive to his lab's work. Notably, in 2007, he received a five-year, $729,000 grant from the to investigate genomic predictors of response to . This , along with other institutional , enabled the initiation of preclinical studies and the of tools for clinical translation, positioning his as a promising avenue in precision oncology. Potti's tenure as faculty concluded amid emerging concerns over his research practices; he voluntarily resigned from his positions as assistant professor (later promoted to associate professor) effective November 19, 2010.

Positions After Leaving Duke

Following his resignation from Duke University in November 2010, Anil Potti transitioned to clinical practice outside of academia. In 2011, Potti joined the Coastal Cancer Center in Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, as a medical oncologist, but departed in February 2012 amid ongoing scrutiny of his prior research. Later that year, in May 2012, he began working at the Cancer Center of in Grand Forks, where he obtained a provisional medical license and full licensure by July. In November 2015, the Office of Research Integrity (ORI) found Potti guilty of research misconduct and imposed a five-year supervision requirement for any involvement in federally funded research activities, following findings related to his earlier work at . Potti has since continued in clinical , maintaining his role as a hematologist and medical oncologist at the Cancer Center of , affiliated with Unity Medical Center, as of 2025.

Scientific Research

Focus on Oncogenomics

Oncogenomics is a subfield of focused on the systematic study of cancer genomes to identify genetic variations, mutations, and expression patterns that drive tumorigenesis and influence disease progression. This approach integrates high-throughput technologies, such as next-generation sequencing and microarrays, to catalog genomic alterations across tumor types, enabling the discovery of biomarkers for , , and therapy selection. By elucidating the molecular underpinnings of cancer heterogeneity, oncogenomics supports the development of strategies that tailor treatments to individual patients' tumor profiles, potentially improving outcomes while minimizing unnecessary toxicity from ineffective therapies. The importance of oncogenomics lies in its potential to shift from empirical, one-size-fits-all treatments to precision interventions based on genomic data, addressing the limitations of traditional histopathological classifications. In the early , the completion of the and the emergence of affordable 'omics technologies spurred a rapid rise in oncogenomic research, transforming cancer biology by revealing complex gene networks and pathway dysregulations underlying malignancies. This era marked a , with studies demonstrating how genomic profiling could predict tumor behavior and therapeutic responses more accurately than clinical variables alone, paving the way for targeted therapies and clinical trials incorporating molecular stratification. Anil Potti's research centered on leveraging analysis within oncogenomics to forecast sensitivity, aiming to optimize treatment regimens for solid tumors. His work emphasized integrating expression signatures derived from tumor samples with to generate predictive models that could inform drug selection, such as distinguishing responders from non-responders to agents like or . This focus aligned with the broader oncogenomic trend of using transcriptomic data to uncover pharmacogenomic insights, highlighting how gene activity patterns could serve as proxies for underlying genomic instability and therapeutic vulnerabilities. However, investigations later revealed in this research, including , leading to retractions of several publications (see Publications and Retractions). In close collaboration with Joseph Nevins, Potti proposed genomic predictors specifically for and cancers, applying oncogenomic principles to refine prognostic and therapeutic decision-making. For instance, they developed the lung metagene model, a gene expression-based classifier intended to stratify early-stage patients by recurrence risk. These efforts exemplified ' role in identifying high-risk subgroups amenable to adjuvant chemotherapy, contributing to the field's momentum toward integrating multi-omic data into routine practice. His faculty position at served as a key platform for conducting these interdisciplinary studies. The associated publications were later retracted due to falsified data.

Development of Predictive Algorithms

Potti's work in developing predictive algorithms centered on leveraging genomic data to forecast cancer patients' responses to , building on principles from oncogenomics where profiles inform tumor behavior and sensitivity. In a 2006 study, he proposed a 512- designed to predict the response of cells to , a common neoadjuvant chemotherapeutic agent. This predictor was derived from analysis of cell lines treated , identifying genes whose expression correlated with drug sensitivity or resistance. The aimed to enable personalized by classifying tumors likely to achieve pathologic complete response () versus residual disease post-. The paper was later retracted due to irreproducible results. The core methodology employed supervised principal components analysis (SPCA), a statistical technique that integrates with to select and weight genes most relevant to the outcome of interest—in this case, chemotherapeutic response—while reducing dimensionality in high-throughput data. SPCA was applied to training datasets from lines, generating principal components that captured variance explained by drug sensitivity, which were then used to build the predictive model. This approach was used to propose the 512-gene predictor, with subsequent papers between 2006 and 2009 refining and attempting to validate this framework, incorporating clinical data from patients to assess its utility in neoadjuvant settings, emphasizing its potential to guide regimen selection for multidrug therapies like TFAC (paclitaxel, 5-fluorouracil, adriamycin, ). Several of these publications were retracted following findings of misconduct. Potti extended similar genomic signature-based predictors to lung cancer, adapting the SPCA methodology to forecast responses to agents like and in (NSCLC). These signatures were developed using expression profiles from NSCLC cell lines and patient samples, focusing on genes associated with platinum-based efficacy to identify responders and inform therapeutic decisions in advanced disease. The lung cancer predictors shared conceptual foundations with the breast cancer models, prioritizing pathway-level insights from data to enhance prognostic and predictive power beyond traditional clinicopathologic factors. These algorithms influenced design, including three phase II trials at that tested predictors like the proposed 512-gene signature to adapt in and patients based on predicted response; the trials enrolled over 100 patients between 2007 and 2010 but were suspended in 2009 and terminated in 2010 due to concerns over irreproducibility and underlying data issues in the research.

Allegations of

Initial Concerns Raised

The initial concerns regarding Anil Potti's research surfaced in early 2008 through internal whistleblower reports at . In late March and early April 2008, third-year medical student Bradford Perez, who was working in Potti's laboratory, submitted a detailed memo titled "Research Concerns" to Potti, senior investigator Joseph Nevins, and several administrators, including Katherine Garman and . Perez highlighted methodological issues in the development of Potti's predictive algorithms for oncogenomics, noting difficulties in reproducing results and potential misrepresentations in data handling that undermined the predictors' validity. officials responded by characterizing the issues as a mere "difference of opinion" and advised Perez against escalating the matter further, effectively silencing the whistleblower at the time. Public scrutiny of Potti's work began earlier but intensified around mid-2008, with bioinformaticians Keith Baggerly and Kevin R. Coombes from the leading efforts to question the reproducibility of the predictive algorithms. Their investigations, initiated in response to Potti's 2006 paper on gene expression-based response predictors, culminated in a July 2008 process for Potti's submission to the (JAMA), where reviewers explicitly referenced Baggerly and Coombes' prior critiques of similar work, demanding additional validation details. Baggerly and Coombes, often referred to in scientific circles as "data hounds" for their rigorous data audits, had previously published a 2007 letter in documenting their inability to replicate key aspects of Potti's genomic signatures using the provided datasets. These external critiques marked the first widespread public concerns in July 2008, focusing on the lack of robust, reproducible methods in Potti's oncogenomics research. Failed replication attempts by independent laboratories further amplified these issues in 2009. Baggerly and Coombes, continuing their analysis at MD Anderson, published a forensic bioinformatics study in the Annals of Applied Statistics that systematically demonstrated the predictors' failure to reproduce across independent datasets, attributing the discrepancies to flaws in and model construction rather than mere technical errors. This work, building on their earlier efforts, confirmed that multiple attempts to validate Potti's algorithms in external settings yielded inconsistent or null results, eroding confidence in the underlying science. Whistleblower reports to Duke also extended to exaggerations in Potti's professional resume, including false claims of faculty status and prestigious awards like Rhodes Scholar selection. These concerns, raised internally around the time of the research allegations but publicly confirmed in 2010, prompted Duke to investigate Potti's credentials separately, revealing he had been listed as an while holding only a position and had misrepresented his academic honors on grant applications and publications. Such reports contributed to broader doubts about Potti's integrity, though they were initially overshadowed by the scientific issues.

Evidence of Data Fabrication

The Office of Research Integrity (ORI) determined that Anil Potti engaged in research misconduct by intentionally falsifying data and related metadata in multiple publications and grant applications, primarily to fabricate of response and . These alterations included changing patient response statuses, switching labels for recurrence or , and modifying numerical values such as IC-50 measurements and R-code outputs to artificially inflate model accuracy and generate misleadingly significant P-values. Independent analyses by biostatisticians Keith Baggerly and Kevin Coombes at revealed that Potti's gene signatures were irreproducible, stemming from the reuse of a limited set of patient samples across studies without disclosure, which created non-independent datasets prone to and false validation. For instance, data files provided to external reviewers contained anomalies like inconsistent sample labels and errors in that prevented replication of published results, indicating systematic to support claims of robust predictors. Potti falsely claimed independent validation sets for his models, but ORI found that he altered datasets post hoc to simulate successful validations on purportedly separate cohorts, disregarding proper scientific methodology. This included reversing responder/non-responder designations for 24 out of 133 subjects in a dataset for an adriamycin response predictor and switching recurrence phenotypes for 46 out of 89 samples in a metastasis signature model. A prominent example is the 2008 JAMA paper on a relapse predictor, where manipulated data to report a falsely accurate 71-gene signature, including altered values that produced manipulated P-values understating the model's poor performance on true independent data. Similarly, the 2006 NEJM paper on a metagene model relied on fabricated results that could not be reproduced, with ORI confirming the predictor's validation was based on switched sample phenotypes and other falsifications.

Institutional Responses

Duke University's Actions

In late 2009, Duke University's established an external review panel to assess concerns about the scientific validity of clinical trials led by Anil Potti, prompted by an expression of concern from the regarding potential issues in the underlying genomic . This internal committee focused on evaluating the and of the research supporting the trials, amid early whistleblower reports from a medical student in 2008 that had been initially downplayed by university administrators. Early in 2010, publicly defended the integrity of Potti's work, restarting the clinical trials in January after the initial review found no immediate red flags, effectively denying allegations of at that stage. However, following a July 2010 report in The Cancer Letter highlighting falsified credentials in Potti's —such as unsubstantiated claims of being a Scholar—and emerging evidence of in predictor models, shifted course by placing Potti on and suspending new enrollments in the trials. By November 2010, the external review confirmed irreproducible results tied to fabricated data elements, leading to terminate the affected clinical trials and accept Potti's voluntary resignation on November 19, 2010, from his positions as of and member of the Institute for Genome Sciences and Policy. This closure halted all ongoing patient enrollment and treatment arms dependent on Potti's genomic predictors, with emphasizing full cooperation in subsequent retractions of related publications.

Federal Oversight by ORI

Following Duke University's internal investigation, which concluded inconclusively regarding certain aspects of the allegations against Anil Potti, the case was referred to the Office of Research Integrity (ORI) in 2011 for federal oversight. ORI collaborated closely with to obtain access to raw research data, patient records, and other materials essential for conducting an independent oversight review of the implicated studies. Through this review, ORI determined that Potti had intentionally falsified and/or fabricated data in nine publications, including alterations to predictors, patient response outcomes, and diagnostic imaging results. ORI issued its official notice of these findings on November 9, 2015, published in the , confirming research misconduct in NIH-supported work spanning 2006 to 2009.

Investigations and Outcomes

Internal Duke Inquiry

In September 2009, Duke University launched an internal inquiry into concerns raised by the National Cancer Institute regarding the reproducibility of results from Anil Potti's oncogenomics research, particularly the genomic signatures used to predict chemotherapy responses in clinical trials. The investigation involved suspending the affected clinical trials and assembling an external review panel of experts in statistics and bioinformatics to examine the raw data, analytical methods, and overall validity of Potti's work. This review process uncovered non-reproducible results, including anomalies in data handling and inconsistencies between reported outcomes and underlying datasets, which raised doubts about the reliability of the predictive algorithms. In early 2010, the external panel initially deemed the research approach viable after a limited assessment, leading to the temporary resumption of the trials; however, critical documents highlighting methodological concerns were withheld from both the panel and Duke's . The trials were later terminated later that year amid escalating issues. A 2012 report by the Institute of Medicine, prompted by the case, concluded that Duke's internal inquiry process exhibited serious flaws, including inadequate transparency and oversight, though it stopped short of explicitly deeming the findings as research misconduct. This assessment contributed to subsequent federal oversight by the Office of Research Integrity as a follow-up measure.

ORI Findings and Sanctions

As part of a voluntary agreement in which he neither admitted nor denied the findings, of Research Integrity (ORI) of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services concluded that Anil Potti engaged in research through the falsification and fabrication of data in fifteen published papers, one submitted , and a Public Health Service (PHS) grant application supported by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI), (NIH), grant R01 HL072208, and the (NCI), NIH, grants R01 CA136530, R01 CA131049, K12 CA100639, R01 CA106520, and U54 CA112952. Specifically, ORI identified involving intentional of genomic and clinical data to misrepresent outcomes in prognostic studies. This determination was informed in part by University's internal inquiry, which uncovered irregularities in the underlying datasets. Potti agreed to a five-year debarment from eligibility for any PHS-funded grants, contracts, or cooperative agreements, effective September 23, 2015. Additionally, Potti agreed to a five-year period of supervision for any future involvement in PHS-supported research, during which employing institutions must submit certifications to ORI confirming compliance and freedom from fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism, along with an ORI-approved supervision plan. These findings and sanctions were formally published in the on November 9, 2015, marking the official federal acknowledgment of Potti's .

Aftermath and Consequences

Professional and Academic Impact

Following his resignation from in November 2010 amid an internal investigation into research , Anil Potti's academic career was severely curtailed. He transitioned to clinical roles outside academia, including a brief position at Coastal Cancer Center in starting in early 2011, from which he departed in February 2012 after scrutiny over his past intensified. Later that year, he joined the Cancer Center of in Grand Forks as a medical oncologist and, as of 2025, continues to work there. The 2015 findings by the U.S. Office of Research Integrity (ORI), which determined that Potti had falsified data in multiple grant applications and publications, imposed a five-year debarment from federal funding effective from that year, rendering him ineligible to serve as principal investigator or senior/key personnel on Public Health Service-supported projects until 2020. This sanction, stemming directly from the ORI investigation, led to the dissolution of his remaining academic collaborations, as institutions and researchers distanced themselves to avoid entanglement with federally funded work. Following the end of the debarment in 2020, Potti has continued clinical practice without engaging in federally funded research. Potti's inability to secure or participate in grants effectively sidelined him from high-level research, diminishing his standing in the oncology and genomics communities where his prior work had once held promise. Regarding his professional credentials, Potti retained his medical license, though it faced disciplinary action; on May 27, 2016, the Medical Board suspended his inactive license due to the established research misconduct during his tenure, while his active practice privileges in other states allowed limited clinical work. He holds an active in since 2012, renewed through 2026, and in through 2026. This reprimand and suspension underscored the enduring impact on his professional viability, confining him to clinical roles without restoring his academic influence.

Legal Settlements and License Status

Following the revelations of research misconduct, Anil Potti faced multiple lawsuits related to his clinical practice at , resulting in 11 settlements with payments made on his behalf by late 2011, each amounting to at least $75,000. These financial repercussions, totaling over $825,000, continued through additional cases reported up to 2015, reflecting broader professional impacts from his halted clinical trials and patient care decisions. In addition to these individual malpractice claims, Potti and were defendants in several lawsuits filed by cancer patients who had enrolled in clinical trials predicated on his falsified genomic data, which led to the abrupt termination of the studies and potential harm to participants. For instance, eight such patient lawsuits were settled out of court by in May 2015, with terms including no admission of by the university or Potti. One prominent case, originally filed in 2011 alleging and in trial enrollment, was among those resolved during this period. Regarding his medical license, the North Carolina Medical Board investigated Potti and issued a formal reprimand on November 22, 2011, citing unprofessional conduct and failure to disclose prior disciplinary actions truthfully on his license application, accompanied by a $500 fine. However, the board did not suspend or revoke his license at that time, allowing him to retain active status in North Carolina until the 2016 suspension of his inactive license. Potti also holds a medical license in South Carolina, granted in 2011, with no reported revocations or further disciplinary actions as of 2012.

Broader Implications

IOM Report on Omics Technologies

The Institute of Medicine (IOM), now known as the , released a pivotal report in 2012 titled Evolution of Translational Omics: Lessons Learned and the Path Forward, which addressed critical challenges in the development and application of -based tests for clinical use. This report was catalyzed by high-profile incidents, including the , where genomic predictors were improperly used in cancer clinical trials without adequate validation. It highlighted systemic issues in translating technologies—such as , , and —from research discoveries to reliable clinical tools, emphasizing the need for standardized practices to ensure and scientific integrity. A core criticism in the report centered on the insufficient validation of prior to their integration into clinical trials. The noted that the pathway from discovery to validated clinical tests is often time-consuming, expensive, and fraught with uncertainty, largely due to underdeveloped and inconsistent standards of evidence for assessing validity. heterogeneity further complicates this process, as data can vary widely across individuals, leading to unreliable predictions if study designs and analytical methods are not appropriately tailored. These shortcomings have resulted in cases where unproven tests influenced trial outcomes, potentially exposing to ineffective or harmful interventions without clear benefits. To address these issues, the report issued targeted recommendations for enhanced oversight and in test development. It urged the (FDA) to play a substantial role in regulating -based tests, particularly those intended for clinical decision-making, by establishing clear guidelines for pre-trial evaluation. Key among these were requirements for rigorous analytical validation to confirm test , clinical or biological validation to verify relevance to disease outcomes, and assessment of clinical utility to demonstrate actionable benefits. The committee also stressed the importance of standards, advocating for precise of test methods, computational models, and handling protocols to enable independent verification and minimize errors in high-dimensional datasets. These measures aim to foster a more robust framework for integration into medicine, prioritizing evidence-based progression from bench to bedside.

Influence on Genomics Research Practices

The scandal served as a foundational influence through the Institute of Medicine's 2012 report on -based tests, which highlighted the need for rigorous standards to prevent similar lapses in research translation to clinical applications. Following the 2012 report, there has been increased emphasis on and reproducibility in studies, including stricter validation requirements for genomic predictors in designs, mandating prospective or prospective-retrospective studies with predefined protocols to confirm clinical utility before patient enrollment. For instance, trials now routinely require analytical validation of assays, including measures of , , and robustness, to avoid premature deployment of unverified signatures in settings. In journals, high-profile claims faced broader scrutiny post-2012, with editors implementing enhanced statistical reviews and demands for replication to filter out inflated predictor performance. This led to more conservative acceptance of -driven prognostic models, prioritizing those with multi-center validation over single-lab findings. Ongoing effects include the standardization of retraction monitoring through platforms like , which gained prominence tracking Potti's 11 retractions and now serves as a routine tool for researchers and institutions to assess publication integrity in . In , the scandal resurfaced in media coverage amid discussions of institutional leadership at , renewing focus on the long-term implications for trust in and the importance of robust oversight in research to prevent and ensure .

Publications and Retractions

Key Retracted Papers

By 2018, eleven papers co-authored by Anil Potti had been formally retracted, primarily due to evidence of falsified and fabricated data as well as irreproducibility of results. These retractions stemmed from investigations revealing misconduct in the genomic analyses used to predict responses, with the U.S. Office of Research Integrity (ORI) confirming in 2015 that Potti intentionally altered data in multiple publications. The first retractions appeared in early 2011, with subsequent retractions tied directly to ORI findings taking place between 2015 and 2018. One prominent example is the 2006 New England Journal of Medicine paper titled "A Genomic Strategy to Refine in Early-Stage Non–Small-Cell ," which proposed a 50-gene signature to stratify and guide in . Retracted in March 2011 following concerns raised by statisticians about data inconsistencies and non-reproducible results, the paper's flaws invalidated its prognostic claims and contributed to the suspension of related clinical trials. Similarly, the 2007 of Clinical Oncology paper "Pharmacogenomic Strategies Provide a Rational Approach to the Treatment of Cisplatin-Resistant Patients With Advanced Cancer" described a genomic predictor for chemotherapy response in patients. This work was retracted in 2013 after ORI investigations confirmed falsification of data used to develop the predictor, rendering its clinical recommendations unreliable. Other key retractions included the 2006 Nature Medicine article "Genomic signatures to guide the use of chemotherapeutics," which retracted in January 2011 due to irreproducible gene expression signatures for topotecan sensitivity in ovarian cancer. A 2007 Lancet Oncology paper, "Validation of gene signatures that predict the response of breast cancer to neoadjuvant chemotherapy," was retracted in January 2011 after concerns were raised in late 2010, as validation attempts failed to replicate the 76-gene predictor's performance. These papers, along with others on breast, ovarian, and colon cancers, shared common issues of manipulated datasets that undermined the algorithms' predictive validity, leading to widespread distrust in Potti's omics-based methodologies.

Papers Under Ongoing Scrutiny

In addition to the fully retracted works, several of Potti's publications have faced leading to for minor data discrepancies and methodological clarifications, though without resulting in retractions. These cases emerged during the broader investigations into his research practices at , highlighting patterns of data handling errors similar to those observed in retracted papers. Two papers published in the Journal of Clinical Oncology were also corrected in February 2012 amid ongoing reviews of Potti's oeuvre. The first, a 2007 study on predicting tumor response to neoadjuvant based on pretreatment profiles, required revisions to presentation and analysis sections due to inconsistencies in sample processing and validation metrics. The second, from 2006, involved integrated genomic strategies for individualized treatment and was amended for similar minor issues in figure legends and supplementary tables related to predictor model performance. These corrections were prompted by external critiques and internal audits, ensuring the integrity of cited datasets without invalidating the reported clinical implications. As of 2025, continues to monitor Potti's publication record, with the case serving as a reference point in discussions of integrity amid renewed media attention to the . No additional retractions or concerns have been formally raised for these corrected papers in recent years, but they remain emblematic of the persistent questions surrounding in early oncogenomics .

Recent Developments

Resurfacing in 2025 Media

In 2025, the Anil Potti resurfaced in major media outlets, drawing renewed attention to University's handling of the case during Kornbluth's tenure as from 2009 to 2014. A Globe investigative article published on August 13 detailed how Kornbluth, now president of , was involved in overseeing the university's response to whistleblower concerns about Potti's falsified cancer research, which had led to halted clinical trials and significant financial repercussions years earlier. The piece highlighted criticisms that Duke administrators, including Kornbluth, had downplayed early warnings of data manipulation in Potti's work on personalized algorithms, allowing the research to persist despite red flags raised as early as 2008. STAT News followed on August 14 with a report on Kornbluth's response to the Globe's findings, where she acknowledged the 's severity but defended 's eventual actions, including the 2012 suspension of 's grants and the implementation of new research integrity measures. The coverage emphasized connections between Kornbluth's past role at —where the unfolded under her administrative watch—and her current leadership at , prompting discussions on institutional accountability in cases. No new evidence of by or others emerged in these reports, but they reignited calls from journalists and ethicists for greater from universities in addressing historical . Additional articles, including one in MIT's student newspaper The Tech on August 21, amplified the scrutiny by questioning whether Kornbluth's experience at had adequately prepared her for upholding standards at , amid broader concerns over a "new age of doubt in science." These publications, spanning August 13 to 21, focused on the scandal's lingering impact rather than fresh investigations, underscoring ongoing debates about responsibility in academic without attributing direct blame to Kornbluth personally.

Current Employment Status

Following the conclusion of his five-year debarment from federal research funding in November 2020, as imposed by the U.S. Office of Research Integrity (ORI) in 2015 for research misconduct, Anil Potti has continued his career in private clinical practice without involvement in federally funded research activities. As of late 2025, Potti remains employed as a board-certified hematologist and medical oncologist at the Cancer Center of in , where he focuses on clinical care for patients with blood disorders and cancers, including administration. Through partnerships with facilities such as Unity Medical Center and , he provides services in the region, serving as a visiting specialist for and related treatments. His practice emphasizes personalized patient support without any reported engagement in research or academic pursuits.

References

  1. [1]
    Former Duke University oncologist is guilty of research misconduct ...
    Nov 10, 2015 · ... Research Integrity (ORI). The researcher, Anil Potti, was an associate professor of medicine at Duke University School of Medicine in Durham ...Missing: biography | Show results with:biography
  2. [2]
    Dr. Anil Potti - Oncology : Specialties - Unity Medical Center
    Anil Potti graduated with a Bachelor of Medicine and Surgery Degree from the Christian Medical College and Hospital in Vellore, India. He completed an Internal ...Missing: AI | Show results with:AI
  3. [3]
    Disgraced cancer researcher with ties to UND subject of '60 Minutes ...
    Feb 12, 2012 · According to his biography, Potti received training in internal medicine at UND's Fargo campus. He then served as an assistant professor at UND ...<|control11|><|separator|>
  4. [4]
    The Duke/Potti Scandal, From the Inside | Science | AAAS
    Jan 14, 2015 · You may remember Anil Potti, the cancer researcher at Duke whose biomarker-driven therapies turned out to be so poorly designed as to be useless ...Missing: AI | Show results with:AI
  5. [5]
    What have we learned from the Anil Potti training and test data ...
    May 31, 2014 · Over 100 patients signed up for the chance to participate in the clinical trials at Duke (2007-10) that promised a custom-tailored cancer ...Missing: biography | Show results with:biography
  6. [6]
    Duke Scientist Suspended Over Rhodes Scholar Claims
    Jul 20, 2010 · Anil Potti, a cancer researcher, is accused of lying about being a Rhodes scholar.Credit...Duke Photography. Some experts at other medical ...
  7. [7]
    Potti found guilty of research misconduct | Science | AAAS
    Nov 9, 2015 · Federal officials have found Potti guilty of research misconduct. The findings bring to a close one of the most egregious US scientific misconduct cases in ...Missing: AI | Show results with:AI
  8. [8]
    Duke University Settles With Cancer Patients After Genetic ... - WUNC
    May 4, 2015 · Disgraced former Duke oncologist Anil Potti conducted genetic research for personalized cancer treatments until 2010. Potti and his team were ...Missing: biography | Show results with:biography<|control11|><|separator|>
  9. [9]
    Anil Potti resurfaces with job at North Dakota cancer center
    Aug 20, 2012 · Anil Potti, the former Duke cancer researcher who has now retracted or corrected 18 papers amidst investigations into his work, is now working at a Grand Forks ...Missing: biography | Show results with:biography
  10. [10]
    What happened with Duke's cancer research fraud? - STAT News
    Aug 13, 2025 · Anil Potti, Juliet's lung cancer was spreading through her torso. She was short of breath, could no longer play tennis, and was afraid she ...
  11. [11]
    Cancer research blow after U-turn - Telegraph India
    Jan 11, 2012 · Potti, who was born in Hyderabad and studied medicine at the Christian Medical College, Vellore, before moving to the US, had been studying ...Missing: MBBS 1995
  12. [12]
    Prominent Duke Scientist Claimed Prizes He Didn't Win, Including ...
    Jul 16, 2010 · Anil Potti is a one-time recipient of ASCO's Travel Award and Merit Award,” a spokesman said. “In 2005, he received the Travel Award and in 2006 ...
  13. [13]
    Scientist suspended over bogus claims - Delhi - Hindustan Times
    Jul 21, 2010 · Potti, who did his MBBS from the Christian Medical College, Vellore before moving to the US, could be held guilty of a federal offense if ...Missing: early life
  14. [14]
    Renowned Grand Forks researcher generated 'false,' 'altered' data ...
    Nov 21, 2015 · Potti graduated in 1995 from the Christian Medical College in Vellore, India. He conducted his residency through a UND program in Fargo from ...Missing: initial | Show results with:initial<|control11|><|separator|>
  15. [15]
    Detailed Case Histories - Fostering Integrity in Research - NCBI - NIH
    Duke suspended the trials and suspended Anil Potti's employment in response. The trials were ultimately terminated and Potti left Duke. Starting in the fall of ...PAXIL CASE · THE HWANG STEM CELL... · THE TRANSLATIONAL OMICS...
  16. [16]
    [PDF] Duke Officials Silenced Med Student Who Reported Trouble in Anil ...
    Jan 9, 2015 · Anil Potti begins fellowship at Duke. He joins Nevins's laboratory in 2004. CAGT hires Potti to establish an independent lab focused on gene ...
  17. [17]
    The Duke Cancer Scandal and Personalized Medicine - Science
    The lead investigator in this sordid business, Anil Potti, ended up retracting four papers on the work and left Duke last fall (although he's since resurfaced ...
  18. [18]
    Anil Potti: Revolutionizing Lung Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
    Mar 11, 2008 · Anil Potti: Revolutionizing Lung Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment ... Patients with the smallest lung tumors are usually offered surgery but not ...Missing: education India Christian Vellore MBBS 1995
  19. [19]
    [PDF] Duke_lawsuit_090811.pdf
    Sep 8, 2011 · 24. Defendant Anil Potti, M.D. joined Duke University and/or DUHS under the control and supervision of Defendant Nevins, in ...
  20. [20]
    How Bright Promise in Cancer Testing Fell Apart
    Jul 7, 2011 · The Duke saga began when a prestigious journal, Nature Medicine, published a paper on Nov. 6, 2006, by Dr. Anil Potti, a cancer researcher at ...
  21. [21]
    Duke returns grant awarded to disgraced researcher - WRAL.com
    Dec 8, 2010 · The money was part of a $729,000 American Cancer Society grant to Dr. Anil Potti in 2007. The organization stopped payment on the rest of ...
  22. [22]
    Duke Accepts Resignation of Dr. Anil Potti
    Nov 19, 2010 · Anil Potti, MD, has voluntarily resigned from his positions as associate professor of medicine at Duke University School of Medicine and at the university's ...Missing: promotion 2007 grants Cancer
  23. [23]
    https://wpde.com/news/local/doctor-in-cancer-research-scandal-leaves-coastal-cancer-center
  24. [24]
    Doctor in cancer research scandal leaves Coastal Cancer Center
    Feb 22, 2012 · Dr. Anil Potti, who is accused of manipulating data in cancer research while he worked at Duke University, is no longer employed at Coastal Cancer Center in ...
  25. [25]
    NOT-OD-16-021: Findings of Research Misconduct
    Nov 16, 2015 · ORI found that Dr. Anil Potti, former Associate Professor of Medicine, Duke, engaged in research misconduct in research supported by National Heart, Lung, and ...Missing: early India Christian Vellore MBBS 1995<|control11|><|separator|>
  26. [26]
    It's official: Anil Potti faked cancer research data, say Feds
    Nov 7, 2015 · Duke's Anil Potti resigns. Duke's Anil Potti, the Duke cancer researcher who falsely claimed to be a Rhodes Scholar and may have faked ...<|control11|><|separator|>
  27. [27]
    About CCND - Cancer Center of North Dakota
    Anil Potti, MD Hematologist and Medical Oncologist. Dr. Anil Potti graduated with a Bachelor of Medicine and Surgery Degree from the Christian Medical ...Missing: position | Show results with:position
  28. [28]
    Oncogenomics - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics
    Oncogenomics refers to the identification and implementation of clinically actionable targets tailored to an individual patient's cancer genomic information.
  29. [29]
    Genetic Testing and Tissue Banking for Personalized Oncology
    Personalized oncology, or more aptly precision oncogenomics, refers to the identification and implementation of clinically actionable targets tailored to an ...<|control11|><|separator|>
  30. [30]
    The future of cancer treatment using precision oncogenomics - PMC
    Clinicians should soon have the opportunity to use precision oncogenomics to tailor the optimal cancer treatment to a specific patient.
  31. [31]
    Omics Profiling in Precision Oncology - PMC - PubMed Central - NIH
    With the advent of omics technology and big data analytics, we can now gather detailed molecular information on the diseased cells, identify obscure patterns ...
  32. [32]
    Genomic signatures to guide the use of chemotherapeutics - PubMed
    We developed gene expression signatures that predict sensitivity to individual chemotherapeutic drugs. Each signature was validated with response data.Missing: oncogenomics | Show results with:oncogenomics
  33. [33]
    Pharmacogenomic Strategies Provide a Rational Approach to the ...
    In the present study, the predictor of cisplatin sensitivity was independently validated in a panel of 32 (lung and ovarian cancer) cell lines, using cell ...
  34. [34]
    A genomic strategy to refine prognosis in early-stage non-small-cell ...
    Methods: We identified gene-expression profiles that predicted the risk of recurrence in a cohort of 89 patients with early-stage NSCLC (the lung metagene model) ...
  35. [35]
    A Genomic Strategy to Refine Prognosis in Early-Stage Non–Small ...
    Aug 10, 2006 · We identified gene-expression profiles that predicted the risk of recurrence in a cohort of 89 patients with early-stage NSCLC (the lung ...Missing: oncogenomics | Show results with:oncogenomics
  36. [36]
    Genomic signatures to guide the use of chemotherapeutics
    Oct 22, 2006 · Potti, A., Dressman, H., Bild, A. et al. Genomic signatures to guide the use of chemotherapeutics. Nat Med 12, 1294–1300 (2006). https://doi ...
  37. [37]
    Validation of gene signatures that predict the response of breast ...
    Validation of gene signatures that predict the response of breast cancer to neoadjuvant chemotherapy: a substudy of the EORTC 10994/BIG 00-01 clinical trial.Missing: 512- 2006-2009
  38. [38]
    Duke Officials Silenced Med Student Who Reported Trouble in Anil ...
    Jan 9, 2015 · The three-page document was penned by Bradford Perez, then a third-year medical student and a Howard Hughes Medical Institute scholar.Missing: biography | Show results with:biography
  39. [39]
    Duke University settles lawsuits alleging that patients were harmed ...
    May 11, 2015 · The trials, launched in 2007 and 2008, were based on Potti's research into a technique that used gene expression to predict which chemotherapy ...
  40. [40]
    [PDF] Workshop B Potti Case Study for Small Group Discussion ¹
    Apr 25, 2023 · In July 2010, The Cancer Letter reported that Potti had falsely claimed to be a prestigious Rhodes Scholar on a grant application. Duke placed ...
  41. [41]
    Duke Updates Response to Potti Allegations
    Aug 27, 2010 · A complete review of the credentials and claims Dr. Potti made in his CV and biosketches, to be led by Provost Peter Lange. 2. A research ...Missing: fellowship | Show results with:fellowship<|control11|><|separator|>
  42. [42]
    Duke's Anil Potti resigns - Retraction Watch
    Nov 19, 2010 · Duke's Anil Potti, the Duke cancer researcher who falsely claimed to be a Rhodes Scholar and may have faked several analyses of chemotherapy ...Missing: current | Show results with:current
  43. [43]
    [PDF] Federal Register/Vol. 80, No. 216/Monday, November 9, 2015/Notices
    Nov 9, 2015 · Anil Potti, former Associate Professor of Medicine,. Duke, engaged in research misconduct in research supported by National Heart,. Lung, and ...<|control11|><|separator|>
  44. [44]
    Findings of Research Misconduct - Federal Register
    Nov 9, 2015 · ORI found that Dr. Anil Potti, former Associate Professor of Medicine, Duke, engaged in research misconduct in research supported by National Heart, Lung, and ...Missing: promotion oncogenomics lab
  45. [45]
    Update: Potti's South Carolina medical license now listed as active
    Feb 24, 2012 · We had a look at his other licenses. Potti's North Carolina license, which was the subject of a reprimand late last year, remains active, ...
  46. [46]
    [PDF] North Carolina Medical Board ISSUE NO. 3 | FALL 2016 - FORUM
    Jul 13, 2016 · PA is indefinitely suspended, effective August 1, 2016. POTTI, Anil, MD. (200601514) Grand Forks, ND. 05/27/2016. MD engaged in research ...
  47. [47]
    Anil Potti reprimanded by North Carolina state medical board, as ...
    Dec 5, 2011 · Anil Potti reprimanded by North Carolina state medical board, as lawsuit settlements surface ... of alleged malpractice. The payments ...Missing: total | Show results with:total
  48. [48]
    Malpractice case against Duke, Anil Potti settled - Retraction Watch
    May 1, 2015 · A lawsuit filed in October 2011 against Duke University and Anil Potti, who has retracted 11 papers and corrected a number of others amidst investigation into ...
  49. [49]
    [PDF] North Carolina Medical Board - Quarterly Disciplinary Report
    Jan 1, 2012 · POTTI, Anil, MD (200601514). Chapel Hill, NC. 11/22/2011. MD's ... Failure to answer truthfully on application for NC medical license. $500.
  50. [50]
    Cancer doctor's license still active in South Carolina - WPDE
    Feb 24, 2012 · Dr. Anil Potti's medical license had been suspended. Potti is accused of manipulating data in cancer research while he worked at Duke University.
  51. [51]
    Introduction - Evolution of Translational Omics - NCBI Bookshelf - NIH
    Mar 23, 2012 · Evolution of Translational Omics: Lessons Learned and the Path Forward. ... A recent IOM report on Evaluation of Biomarkers and Surrogate ...
  52. [52]
    IOM Report Recommends Evaluation and Validation Process to ...
    Agencies and companies that fund omics research should require this disclosure and support the cost of independently managed databases to hold the information.
  53. [53]
    Lapses in oversight compromise omics results - Nature
    Mar 23, 2012 · The case in question, which revolves around papers relating to cancer treatment published by researcher Anil Potti, indicates a need for higher ...Missing: NEJM title<|separator|>
  54. [54]
    Evaluation of Omics-Based Tests for Clinical Utility and Use - NCBI
    This chapter explains the recommended steps for assessing a validated omics-based test for clinical utility and use.
  55. [55]
    Review of Omics-Based Tests for Predicting Patient Outcomes in ...
    This report identifies best practices to enhance development, evaluation, and translation of omics-based tests while simultaneously reinforcing steps
  56. [56]
    anil potti retractions
    A lawsuit filed in October 2011 against Duke University and Anil Potti, who has retracted 11 papers and corrected a number of others amidst investigation into ...
  57. [57]
    The Anil Potti retraction record so far
    Feb 14, 2012 · The Anil Potti retraction record so far. A 60 Minutes segment Sunday on Anil Potti has drawn national attention to the case, so we thought this ...
  58. [58]
    A Genomic Strategy to Refine Prognosis in Early-Stage Non–Small ...
    Retraction: A Genomic Strategy to Refine Prognosis in Early-Stage Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer. N Engl J Med 2006;355:570-80. VIEW THE RELATED ARTICLE. Authors: ...Missing: title | Show results with:title
  59. [59]
    Two mega-corrections for Anil Potti in the Journal of Clinical Oncology
    Feb 10, 2012 · Anil Potti earned what is called a “doctor” in India with 4.5 years of studies to earn his bachelor's degree and 13 months of “residency ...
  60. [60]
    Putting Oncology Patients at Risk - PMC - NIH
    In November 2007, Nature Medicine published Baggerly and Coombes's letter about unresolved questions, a reply from Potti, and a correction to the original paper ...Missing: duplication | Show results with:duplication
  61. [61]
    Author Correction | Journal of Clinical Oncology - ASCO Publications
    Author Correction. Publication: Journal of Clinical Oncology. Volume 30 ... Potti et al (Nat Med 12:1294-1300, 2006) that was referenced in this article. 1) The ...
  62. [62]
    Sally Kornbluth tested by Duke research scandal before MIT job
    Aug 13, 2025 · By the time Walter and Juliet Jacobs went to see Dr. Anil Potti, Juliet's lung cancer was spreading through her torso. She was short of breath, ...<|separator|>
  63. [63]
    MIT president response to Duke cancer fraud investigation
    Aug 14, 2025 · Anil Potti, who claimed to have created algorithms that could analyze tumors and pick the best chemotherapy cocktail to treat cancer patients.<|control11|><|separator|>
  64. [64]
    MIT's Kornbluth responds to Globe report on Duke academic fraud
    Aug 13, 2025 · Anil Potti, who claimed to have created algorithms that could analyze tumors and pick the best chemotherapy cocktail to treat cancer patients.
  65. [65]
    Boston Globe publishes article about Kornbluth's handling of cancer ...
    Article seems to criticize Kornbluth for failing to identify Anil Potti's research misconduct sooner. By Vivian Hir Aug. 21, 2025.
  66. [66]
    MIT President Kornbluth Under Fire Over $112 Million Duke Cancer ...
    Aug 18, 2025 · Anil Potti's falsified cancer genomics research. Whistleblower warnings ignored between 2007–2010. Federal investigations and Duke's $112 ...
  67. [67]
    Penalty Too Light - The Cancer Letter
    Nov 13, 2015 · The ORI found that Dr. Potti engaged in several instances of research misconduct and banned him from receiving federal funding for five years.Missing: debarment | Show results with:debarment
  68. [68]
    Dr. Anil Potti, MD | Grand Forks, ND | Oncologist | US News Doctors
    Rating 4.0 (61) Dr. Anil Potti is a Oncologist in Grand Forks, ND. Find Dr. Potti's phone number, address, insurance information, hospital affiliations and more.
  69. [69]
    Oncology : Specialties - Unity Medical Center
    Anil Potti. Click HERE to see their schedules. Dr. Anil Potti ... Touch device users can use touch and swipe gestures. © 2025 – Unity Medical Center –.
  70. [70]
    Heartbeat Newsletter Spring 2025 by umcfoundation - Issuu
    Mar 18, 2025 · Anil Potti, hematologist and medical oncologist from the Cancer Center of North Dakota, was the first visiting provider to use the new space ...