Singapore: report slams non-ethical research practices, director fired

Singapore's efforts to become a global hub for the biomedical sciences faced its first major hurdle last week with the sacking of world-renowned British neurologist, Dr Simon Shorvon, from his post as the director of the National Neuroscience Institute.

The dismissal occurred after an independent panel of four respected medical doctors found that Shorvon, and his research associate Dr Ramachandran Viswanathan, had seriously breached ethical guidelines while conducting a $SG10 million ($AUD9.4 million) research project focusing on mutations in the DNA of Parkinson's and epilepsy patients in an attempt to find a cure.

The 180-page report, released by the panel on April 4, found that Shorvon and his team recruited patients for his project, without their knowledge or consent, by obtaining pharmacy records of Parkinson's sufferers from Tan Tock Seng Hospital and Singapore General Hospital, completely sidestepping the patients' doctors. 127 patients were then selected and put through a regimen of L-Dopa drug testing, used to determine whether or not a patient is suffering from Parkinson's disease. One bed-ridden patient was administered four times his normal dose during testing for the project.

It was reported that Shorvon chose this course of action once he realised there was a serious shortage in the number of patients available for the study. To complete the research Dr Shorvon needed to recruit 750 patients by July this year. In July last year, his team was far short of this target, with 12 patients they had drafted through ethical means.

The report described Shorvon's actions as "unacceptable in any civilised country" and concluded that "the rights and dignity of the human subjects were disregarded... It is unacceptable in Singapore."

Shorvon has accepted the report and its findings unequivocally. Ramachandran has since fled to India. Both scientists now are the subject of police investigations.

The news has sent shockwaves through Singapore's broader biomedical science community. Three years ago, the recruitment of Shorvon as the director of the National Neuroscience Institute (NNI) was seen as a major step forward in the nation's bid for biomed glory. Seconded from the University College, London, and an eminent scientist in his field, he was expected to lead the Institute to world-class status. It's no wonder that the two most common questions asked now are 'How did he gain access to confidential patient records without permission from the patients' doctor?', and 'Why would he risk everything by doing this?'

The 'how' is much easier to answer than the 'why'. Shorvon used his influence as the Director of the NNI and his reputation as a respected scientist to open doors, and approved the requests for information himself. "If you are very senior, people will always want to help, to support you," Prof Pin Lim told Singapore newspaper The Straits Times. "If you were a pharmacist, it would be very hard to say no." Lim is a member of the independent panel that conducted the investigation, and is also the chairman of Singapore's Bioethics Advisory Committee, the government's independent biomedical research watchdog.

As for the 'why', many of the industry's research scientists and business professionals believe that there is more to this story than what is being presented. But most speculate that the pressure to succeed would have played a major role in the ethical misconduct of Shorvon, someone who 'should have known better.'

"Dr Shorvon is a 25-year research veteran, so it is hard to believe that he would consciously make mistakes like this. I am not sure we have all the facts," a leading research scientist, who chose to remain anonymous, told Australian Biotechnology News. "I am, however, very pleased with the way the situation has been dealt with. It is good that Dr Shorvon has been made an example of, and it shows that Singapore is serious about biomedical science."

Over the past few years Singapore's rapid entry onto the global biomedical science stage has raised many concerns regarding its practices. Many analysts ponder how the industry in the nation-state has expanded so successfully and so quickly without cutting any corners.

While the ultimate repercussions of this ethical misconduct are still unknown, some say positive conclusions can be drawn from the efficient and direct handling of the situation by the Singapore government.