Researchers allege scientific misconduct after leaving U.

Accusations of scientific misconduct have reached the highest levels of the University. And no one is talking except for the alleged victims. In 1990, researchers Sang Joo Kim and L. Craig Wagerle were working together in a laboratory at the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, conducting experiments to determine the effects of cocaine on blood flow in the brain. But two years later, both men were without jobs. Kim was fired for insubordination in September 1991, when he refused to answer questions about his job performance and qualifications from then-Associate General Counsel for the University Neil Hamburg. According to a statement released yesterday by the University's Medical Center, Wagerle's position expired in July 1992 "due to a lack of continued research funding." And in May 1993, a paper was published by some of Wagerle and Kim's former co-workers that the pair charge uses their data and lists their conclusions without proper attribution. Since leaving their posts, former research specialist Kim and former associate professor of physiology Wagerle have lodged numerous scientific misconduct allegations with federal and state agencies, relating to the circumstances surrounding their departure and the subsequent submissions their former colleagues made to scientific journals. But most of these claims -- including one that was filed with the U.S. Department of Labor and investigated here in Philadelphia -- have been decided in favor of the University. University sources say that Wagerle, who had also served as director of basic research in the division of neonatal and perinatal medicine at HUP, and Kim are essentially disgruntled former employees, attempting to make a career out of leveling complaints against the University for personal gain. "The University believes that this is a continuing pattern of meritless complaints -- we're at a disadvantage because of our own policies regarding confidentiality," said one official who requested anonymity. "We take very seriously allegations of scientific misconduct, no matter what the source." The continuing saga of Wagerle and Kim began in July 1990, when both became whistleblowers ostensibly protected by law. Wagerle's supervisor -- and the director of the laboratory where he carried out his work -- was Professor of Physiology and Pediatrics Maria Delivoria-Papadopoulos, who had a clinical appointment at HUP in addition to her academic position at the Medical School. Medical Center Spokesperson Lori Doyle said Delivoria-Papadopoulos has since been relieved of her administrative duties for unrelated reasons. Because she was simultaneously expected to see patients and conduct research, Research Assistant Professor O. P. Mishra was employed as Delivoria-Papdopoulos's "major research instrument," according to Kim. "Mishra obtained radioactive isotope P[hosphorus]-32 because he wanted to use P-32 for a certain experiment," Kim said recently. "Our laboratory was not equipped and prepared to possess and use that particular isotope." Since he knew that having radioactive P-32 in the lab was a violation of U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission rules and regulations, Kim immediately told Wagerle that Mishra had obtained the isotope. Wagerle stopped Mishra from using the P-32, brought the incident to the attention of the University's radiation safety officer, and thought the case was closed. But Wagerle said the incident resurfaced in September 1990, when he approached Delivoria-Papadopoulos to ask for a raise for Kim. "When I brought the matter of his report [of the P-32] to my boss [Delivoria-Papadopoulos], she called him a bastard," Wagerle said this week, adding that Delivoria-Papadopoulos also started rumors that Kim's past was shady and his references questionable. Wagerle said Delivoria-Papadopoulos directed him to terminate Kim in December 1990. Wagerle refused, saying that she could not provide any "good reason" for such a decision. Wagerle, who has since met two people who wrote letters of recommendation for Kim, said he was never able to substantiate any of the assertions Delivoria-Papadopoulos advanced against Kim. "It is inconceivable to me that they could have written poor letters on his behalf," he said, adding that he was told the letters in question had disappeared from Kim's file when he asked for them in February 1991. Shortly thereafter, Kim said he and Wagerle began to experience adverse personnel actions. He claimed that locks on their laboratory space were changed, a refrigerator that held specimens and reagents was ransacked, and Wagerle's name was removed from the Physiology Department faculty roster. Wagerle said his pay structure was also changed, forcing him to rely on grants to support both his research and salary -- and requiring him to get more than "rubber-stamp" approval from Delivoria-Papadopoulos before sending out grant requests, which she would not give. He said he believes these actions were retaliatory in nature, stemming from his refusal to fire Kim. Delivoria-Papadopoulos declined to comment on any aspect of her interaction with Wagerle and Kim, citing a lawsuit filed against her and another HUP physician by Wagerle in August 1994. And because Wagerle and Kim contend their data was published without their knowledge or names by former colleagues in May 1993, both the University and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) have been attempting to resolve the issue of rightful authorship. Although the case is federally-docketed with the DHHS Office of Research Integrity, Special Agent Bertrand Zanck said he could neither confirm nor deny whether an investigation is ongoing. "I'm prohibited against commenting, as a standard law enforcement [practice]," he said. Assistant Professor of Anesthesia, Pediatrics and Physiology C. Dean Kurth said he "enjoyed a very fruitful collaboration" with Wagerle throughout the 1980s, but never worked with Kim. The collaboration between Kurth and Wagerle ceased in 1990, when Kurth's laboratory moved from HUP to the Medical School. Kurth is listed as first author on the paper in question, entitled "Cocaine and its Metabolites Constrict Cerebral Arterioles in Newborn Pigs," which appeared in the May 1993 issue of The Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics. But Wagerle said that a similar manuscript had been accepted -- although not published -- by the American Journal of Physiology in 1991, because he would not sign a copyright release that excluded Kim from authorship, as a University committee had recommended following investigation. "They required me to send a letter concurring with [their] opinion or lose my own right to authorship," Wagerle said. "I [could] not ethically agree to the deletion of his name." Wagerle also charged that Kurth had the same manuscript under consideration at two different journals simultaneously, which is not permitted by standard scientific protocol. Kurth, however, said that the research reported in the JPET article was completed "well after" he stopped working with Wagerle. Comparison of Kim and Wagerle's abstracts and the Kurth paper reveals that while they relate to the same subject area, each used animals of different ages in attempting to understand a specific research problem. "We followed those [University authorship] guidelines to the letter," Kurth said. But Wagerle said he still has not been permitted to access and examine the raw data involved, and as a result, cannot account for the $300,000 grant from the National Institute for Drug Abuse and National Institutes of Health that funded his research. He claims that because he is not cited in Kurth's paper, he cannot prove he carried out similar research. Both Kim and Wagerle have filed formal complaints with the University in hopes of resolving the authorship dispute. In accordance with the University's Procedures Regarding Misconduct in Research, a preliminary inquiry committee of two individuals who are "unbiased and have appropriate backgrounds to judge the issues being raised" was appointed by Medical School Vice Dean for Research and Research Training Neal Nathanson in September of this year. University regulations state that such preliminary inquiry committees are to complete their investigative process within 60 days of formation, but committee member and Professor Emeritus of Research Medicine Robert Austrian said that because two separate but related complaints have been received from Kim and Wagerle, the time frame has been extended. "[The committee] will be finished within the next month," he said. "These matters are confidential according to the University's regulations as I understand them. They are proceeding as they are supposed to." Yet Kim claims there have been irregularities even in this stage of investigation, because Medical School Dean William Kelley identified him as the complainant in a letter about the case carbon-copied to Kurth -- an action that contradicts official policy. "The University is just dragging its feet because it's a very difficult issue," Kim said, adding that he anticipates filing a lawsuit in this matter. Although he is currently working at Temple University, Wagerle said he does not know if he will be able to obtain grant funding there. "This whole thing is a continuum, the [journal article] is just the last event," Wagerle said. "It mushroomed and split into parts -- we just want the truth out."

Please note All comments are eligible for publication in The Daily Pennsylvanian.