寺本英巳（Hidemi Teramoto、筆頭・責任著者、論文発表時、医療法人香流会 紘仁病院 医師、経歴、写し）らの論文が倫理委員会の承認の遡及的無効で撤回された。撤回公告（写し）と撤回論文（写し）。寺本英巳は2011年時に紘仁病院の副院長だった（写し）。
このような理由で論文が撤回されるのは珍しい。確かに倫理規範に違反した研究論文なら撤回になっても仕方ないが、臨床時に倫理規範を遵守したのに、後から国立療養所邑久光明園の倫理委員会が承認を取り消し、承認が遡及的に無効になったので論文が撤回になるとは。リトラクションウォッチは、このようなケースは撤回より訂正や懸念表明がより適切ではないかと言及。しかし、JCMの編集者Alexander McAdam氏はリトラクションウォッチに対して以下のように回答（赤紫色部分）。
--
We think a correction or expression of concern might have been a more appropriate step here, but Alexander McAdam, the editor of the JCM, said retraction was the right step:
I think a retraction is appropriate in this case. The Instructions to Authors for the Journal of Clinical Microbiology say that “Retractions are reserved for major errors or breaches of ethics that, for example, may call into question the source of the data or the validity of the results and conclusions of an article.” As described in the retraction, the leadership of the Patient’s Council concluded that the permission had not been granted for use of some tissues in the study, and the institutional Ethics Committee determined that concern was great enough to cancel approval for the research. I think this is a breach of ethics that calls into question the source of the data because needed consent was not obtained for the use of human tissues.
And McAdam said he was comfortable with the retroactive nature of the ethics review:
To me, it is significant that a currently standing committee with ethics oversight, the Ethics Committee of the National Sanatorium Oku-Komyo-En, concluded that retroactive cancellation of approval was required based on concerns raised by the patients’ representatives. I think that is adequate reason for retraction based on the JCM Instructions to Authors and on my concerns described in the earlier email.
(リトラクションウォッチより、写し)
--
本件の撤回をどう思いますか？