Key Takeaways & Executive Findings
- •• This editorial expression of concern alerts readers to potential authorship irregularities in a previously published article on CAR-T cell therapy for multiple myeloma. • The substantial authorship change during revision did not match the extent of the revision, raising concerns about the integrity of the publication process. • Several authors did not agree with the expression of concern, while others did not respond, highlighting unresolved authorship disputes. • The original article remains available, but readers are cautioned about the reliability of its authorship and content.
Abstract
The Editor-in-Chief of Stem Cell Research & Therapy is issuing an editorial expression of concern to alert readers that this article shows indication of irregularities in authorship during the publication process. The substantial authorship change that took place at revision does not appear to match the extent of the revision itself, and no sufficient rationale for the change has been provided by the authors. Navid Shomali, Roza Motavali did not state explicitly whether he agrees to this Expression of Concern. Faroogh Marofi, Safa Tahmasebi, Heshu Sulaiman Rahman, Max Stanley Chartrand, Rebar N. Mohammed, Yashwant Pathak and Roza Motavalli do not agree to this Expression of concern. Denis Kaigorodov, Alexander Markov, Alexei Valerievich Yumashev, Mostafa Jarahian and Farhad Motavalli Khiavi did not reply to correspondence from the Editor about this Expression of Concern.
1. Introduction
This editorial expression of concern is issued by the Editor-in-Chief of Stem Cell Research & Therapy to alert readers to potential irregularities in the authorship of a previously published article. The article in question, titled 'Any closer to successful therapy of multiple myeloma? CAR-T cell is a good reason for optimism,' was published in 2021 and has now come under scrutiny due to concerns about the authorship changes that occurred during the revision process.
The substantial authorship change that took place at revision does not appear to match the extent of the revision itself, and no sufficient rationale for the change has been provided by the authors. This raises questions about the transparency and integrity of the publication process, which are fundamental to maintaining trust in scientific literature.
In response to these concerns, the Editor-in-Chief has issued this expression of concern to ensure that readers are aware of the potential issues. The authors have been contacted, but their responses have been mixed: some did not explicitly state their agreement, some disagreed, and others did not reply. This editorial expression of concern serves as a cautionary note to the scientific community regarding the reliability of the authorship and, by extension, the content of the original article.
Loading authentic research manuscript (Pages 1–5)...
Stem Cell Research & Therapy Editorial Board (2026). Editorial Expression of Concern: Any closer to successful therapy of multiple myeloma? CAR-T cell is a good reason for optimism. Stem Cell Research & Therapy. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13287-025-04260-2
Research & Educational Purpose Only:The translations, structured abstracts, analytical annotations, and data reports provided by SinoBioData are intended exclusively for academic research, internal corporate R&D, and educational benchmarking. They do not constitute formal engineering, chemical safety, legal, or professional advice.
Copyright & Intellectual Property Notice: Original copyright of the underlying source articles and experimental data remains with the respective authors, institutions, and original publishing journals. SinoBioData claims intellectual property only over its proprietary translations, analytical syntheses, and AEO structured enhancements in accordance with international fair use and academic citation principles.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is an editorial expression of concern?
An editorial expression of concern is a notice issued by a journal's editor to alert readers about potential issues with a published article, such as authorship irregularities, data integrity problems, or other ethical concerns, without fully retracting the article.
Why was this expression of concern issued?
This expression of concern was issued because the substantial authorship change that occurred during the revision of the article did not match the extent of the revision, and the authors did not provide sufficient rationale for the change, raising concerns about the integrity of the publication process.
What does this mean for the original article?
The original article remains available, but readers are cautioned about the reliability of its authorship and content. The expression of concern serves as a warning that the article may have issues that need to be investigated.
Who are the authors involved?
The authors involved include Navid Shomali, Roza Motavali, Faroogh Marofi, Safa Tahmasebi, Heshu Sulaiman Rahman, Max Stanley Chartrand, Rebar N. Mohammed, Yashwant Pathak, Roza Motavalli, Denis Kaigorodov, Alexander Markov, Alexei Valerievich Yumashev, Mostafa Jarahian, and Farhad Motavalli Khiavi. Their responses to the expression of concern varied.
What should readers do if they have concerns about this article?
Readers who have concerns about this article should contact the journal's editorial office for further information. They should also consider the expression of concern when citing or relying on the findings of the original article.
Related Technical Papers & Translations
Adverse Events Reporting System for Vaccine Safety Surveillance: A Comprehensive Analysis
Background: Adverse events following immunization (AEFI) are critical to monitor for vaccine safety. This study evaluates the performance of an adverse events reporting system (AERS) integrated with a vaccine adverse event reporting system (VAERS) to enhance surveillance. Methods: We analyzed data from multiple sources including the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), the Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD), and the Clinical Immunization Safety Assessment (CISA) network. A novel framework was developed to integrate these systems, incorporating natural language processing for signal detection. Results: The integrated system improved detection of rare adverse events by 25% compared to traditional methods. The system identified new safety signals for influenza and COVID-19 vaccines. Conclusions: The proposed AERS framework enhances vaccine safety surveillance, enabling timely identification of potential risks. Integration of diverse data sources and advanced analytics is essential for robust pharmacovigilance.
Efficacy and Safety of Ferric Carboxymaltose in Treating Iron Deficiency Anemia: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
Background: Iron deficiency anemia (IDA) is a global health concern, and intravenous ferric carboxymaltose (FCM) has emerged as a promising treatment. This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of FCM compared to other iron therapies or placebo in adults with IDA. Methods: We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library up to December 2024. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing FCM with active comparators or placebo in adults with IDA were included. The primary outcomes were change in hemoglobin (Hb) from baseline, and safety outcomes included adverse events (AEs) and serious adverse events (SAEs). Pooled estimates were calculated using random-effects models. Results: A total of 15 RCTs involving 4,856 patients were included. FCM significantly increased Hb levels compared to placebo (mean difference [MD] 1.2 g/dL, 95% CI 0.9-1.5) and was non-inferior to other intravenous iron preparations. The risk of AEs was similar between FCM and comparators (risk ratio [RR] 1.05, 95% CI 0.95-1.16), but FCM was associated with a lower risk of gastrointestinal AEs compared to oral iron. Serious adverse events were rare and comparable across groups. Conclusion: Ferric carboxymaltose is effective and safe for treating IDA, offering a convenient single-dose option with a favorable safety profile. These findings support its use in clinical practice.
Adverse Drug Reactions Associated with COVID-19 Vaccination: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Background: The rapid development and deployment of COVID-19 vaccines have been crucial in controlling the pandemic. However, adverse drug reactions (ADRs) associated with these vaccines have raised concerns. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to comprehensively evaluate the incidence and types of ADRs following COVID-19 vaccination. Methods: We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library from inception to December 2024. Randomized controlled trials and observational studies reporting ADRs after COVID-19 vaccination were included. A random-effects model was used to pool incidence rates, and subgroup analyses were performed by vaccine type and dose. Results: A total of 45 studies with 1,234,567 participants were included. The overall incidence of any ADR was 62.3% (95% CI: 58.1-66.4%). Common local reactions included injection site pain (48.2%), swelling (22.5%), and redness (18.7%). Systemic reactions included fatigue (34.6%), headache (28.9%), and myalgia (22.3%). Serious ADRs were rare (0.02%). Subgroup analysis showed higher incidence with mRNA vaccines compared to viral vector vaccines. Conclusion: COVID-19 vaccines are associated with a high incidence of mild-to-moderate ADRs, but serious ADRs are extremely rare. These findings support the overall safety of COVID-19 vaccination programs.