MIT clears bioengineering professor’s misconduct allegations

[ad_1]

For nearly four years, a bioengineering professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology has remained silent as an investigation unfolds into allegations that his research copied the work of others. This investigation is complete, finding no basis that Ram Sasisekharan or members of his lab engaged in research misconduct.

The findings were disclosed by Maria Zuber, vice president of research at MIT. In a message to the MIT community dated March 14 and now posted on the university’s website, Zuber said his exam results are generally kept confidential in accordance with university policy and federal regulations.

However, given the very public discourse on these allegations, I believe, and Professor Sasisekharan agrees, that sharing this information with you is necessary to close this case, quell any remaining rumors or speculation, and help restore fully the reputations of Professor Sasisekharan and members of his lab, Zuber wrote. Furthermore, we are committed to ensuring that Professor Sasisekharan and his laboratory can resume their normal activities.

Sasisekharans’ research focuses on antibody engineering. His work led to the creation of several biotechnology companies, such as Momenta Pharmaceuticals, Tychan and Visterra. In 2019, the journal mAbs published an article alleging that two computer-designed antibodies from the Sasisekharans lab were derived from existing antibodies. All authors worked for Adimab, an antibody discovery company. One of them was Tillman Gerngross, professor of bioengineering at Dartmouth College, whose research also led to the creation of several biotech companies, including Adimab.

After the article published in mAbs, Sasisekharan initially pushed back against his allegations. He pointed out that the paper had been accepted within two days of submission and had not been peer reviewed. Moreover, he said that neither the authors nor the editors of the journal contacted him and that he only heard about it from a reporter for the Wall Street Journal, who provided him with the preprint. He also said he was considering possible legal action. But shortly after the article was published in mAbs, MIT said it received an internal complaint alleging research misconduct regarding the same research discussed in the article. This complaint triggered the university’s investigation.

Zuber’s letter says Sasisekharan and others in his lab cooperated fully with the investigation, which was conducted in accordance with university policies and procedures. These policies included a requirement that Sasisekharan refrain from speaking publicly about the matter during the investigation. Zuber did not elaborate on the findings of the investigation, other than to state that MIT used its standard three-part review process to determine whether there was sufficient evidence to conclude misconduct in research. This process used a standard of preponderance of evidence. In a statement, Sasisekharan said he was satisfied with the outcome of the university’s investigation.

The past three and a half years have been extremely difficult for my lab, my family and me, Sasisekharan said. The very public attack we suffered, along with our failure to publicly defend ourselves, was a most egregious abuse of the research misconduct process. Being publicly attacked and confidentially silenced has had an extremely negative impact on my lab staff and the students we mentor and train.

Now that Sasisekharan is free to discuss the matter, the scientist has renewed his denial of the mAbs paper’s claims with detailed responses posted on his lab’s website. Some members of the scientific community are also joining the resistance, calling on mAbs to withdraw the Adimab article.

Photo: Victor J. Blue/Bloomberg, via Getty Images

[ad_2]