{"id":35362,"date":"2026-03-19T10:57:51","date_gmt":"2026-03-19T10:57:51","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/clearingtheair.eu\/?p=35362"},"modified":"2026-03-19T10:58:59","modified_gmt":"2026-03-19T10:58:59","slug":"review-linking-vaping-to-cancer-retracted-after-serious-flaws-found","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/clearingtheair.eu\/en\/post\/review-linking-vaping-to-cancer-retracted-after-serious-flaws-found\/","title":{"rendered":"Review linking vaping to cancer retracted after \u201cserious flaws\u201d found"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"clear-before-content-2\" style=\"margin-top: 20px;margin-bottom: 20px;margin-left: auto;margin-right: auto;text-align: center;\" id=\"clear-2190483468\"><img src=\"https:\/\/clearingtheair.eu\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/caafc5c68900198b80aee12c11b50184.avif\" alt=\"\"   style=\"display: inline-block;\" \/><\/div>\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li><strong>A scientific review examining vaping and cancer risk has been formally retracted by its journal.<\/strong><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Editors said \u201csubstantial concerns were raised regarding the methodological integrity, accuracy, and scientific validity of the review.\u201d<\/strong><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>The investigation identified \u201cmultiple serious flaws that materially affect the reliability of the findings and conclusions.\u201d<\/strong><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>The editor concluded the article \u201cdoes not meet the standards of scientific accuracy and reliability required for publication.\u201d<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p>A scientific paper examining whether vaping may increase the risk of cancer has been formally retracted after editors identified serious methodological problems.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/pdf.sciencedirectassets.com\/283535\/1-s2.0-S2213538325X00035\/1-s2.0-S2213538325000591\/main.pdf?X-Amz-Security-Token=IQoJb3JpZ2luX2VjEA8aCXVzLWVhc3QtMSJHMEUCIDl3s9tQ12Pb1FZxE%2FszlMrBUE%2FmS1S%2Fg7rjkat1WtV3AiEA0zQuVXLMMrcG085fIqy%2F78Ft6kr4jc1luX%2BlRBW7F1QquwUI1%2F%2F%2F%2F%2F%2F%2F%2F%2F%2F%2FARAFGgwwNTkwMDM1NDY4NjUiDNIPr%2Ff6S6qrJxWgJSqPBblTI7%2Fgx21QNES8EG9KuSTrhwXaUkqpSJsenZeb%2FYlJOYLXcCZGaqOkMWOSfN%2BgFbnwYuTZyOUmJeUY2oki%2Fo7N8DqP104Xs55WinEKDG5qV89yUcIf3Nx%2B0qW4%2FoPIGuiUI9PtAnuThojvi01ncPkuTuah3kvVDiCuUHfvBHm7srZRMsshu1%2FNUmEx9Ue4m8OksAaHWcDhAV9TeDvA%2FfWzOP10eHz9APnlEJ2hyD0yFPzZWlU5m1cjvzZ%2F%2BFN72abLrUu7RZCDoZDMCAC5TbQ2xKY4rkJ3FlmV1ymUnrjSC4r4TpdN%2BgPtUy7NnPJIoyLnaJ6QTP%2BuJqP41w5VguTlB23xEyfJ6RR%2BJ1MBAQleIYC2Mpq9llsiZVGgXvW2hS52j3yaLTR8MDYG8xXgywZ2sb7yYViRgxb%2BmWD42cktE3R%2BIciFCOPpimtvtuORqJxdNHoOcnVpECLdhhVCmyFu4AmMGZ7R%2BU0BwiZYhqPZTU%2ByU2oaP9yrOdYeIeBQJQqriY9HSvPNob%2BKU7wC7bhhMe1g5ruZKgd%2FZ%2Fo9uYafMRTi2NxcDJfa%2BPAl5bPMikd8Jz36pbBn6qS8fVLcR5iIi9o%2B3dLRgrzEcIOkvpam8Rp9msscRoRECSaw9zeSaXRB0d%2FovGi6Wk0lZOJUTHXe8Stk13gko965ufc%2Fv38vNffqhnML%2F2r%2BWP8j9PzmUmA1WodoZIvYG3rwj3qiVbKWwJvkqzb642j0SsMJAlKJ3QT%2F7jDWb6VBQWMbje2RLN%2BcGcotKYW4KcrMTaJf1IlXMHlUCqsjbsIuQDnEF63RJj3pO2%2B0nGV87HU9qUrJ4mNTzd1LyxlYq3ohMFSzXyMXBZl%2Bw1ihCdn%2FoIIRCx0wiqLgzQY6sQFCx8HvxnYSGM7ojjB8aq6M5Q21t9xmPOMnjvjQVMKMBmKroXpW41%2FqyeBYZyMQcqdN64VugvMWP7XyWI73JvVR%2FWdZk5OlUqA%2Fnwx1pUrdR73XczjDKMfDoTwYKgHsPdkLyydfxpxufX9NmMGLt0jSf0ccxYuB%2Bnx6ViGc8Kan%2F3D6B14BTawejf%2FZqYd1nyk7aYNtxzx73fHVX5JX3PLdf%2FLQIx0g7L%2FW6zWXkwVxgLI%3D&amp;X-Amz-Algorithm=AWS4-HMAC-SHA256&amp;X-Amz-Date=20260316T151114Z&amp;X-Amz-SignedHeaders=host&amp;X-Amz-Expires=300&amp;X-Amz-Credential=ASIAQ3PHCVTY6EP5WYET%2F20260316%2Fus-east-1%2Fs3%2Faws4_request&amp;X-Amz-Signature=e972741d7823370cd35253119907eb3a1ce799530a8b642947ca0b252fe0971f&amp;hash=d0480819d63e5d6d8638c711d08ea873ff2b6e23c5b4a46a17468975ead9d5f1&amp;host=68042c943591013ac2b2430a89b270f6af2c76d8dfd086a07176afe7c76c2c61&amp;pii=S2213538325000591&amp;tid=spdf-0ba9555d-5389-463b-a3b2-b1c349ef68f4&amp;sid=733aa32645926841fa2ab0e6203a6bb7861fgxrqb&amp;type=client&amp;tsoh=d3d3LnNjaWVuY2VkaXJlY3QuY29t&amp;rh=d3d3LnNjaWVuY2VkaXJlY3QuY29t&amp;ua=050d5c060253045059&amp;rr=9dd4b06faf86d874&amp;cc=gb\" rel=\"nofollow noopener\" target=\"_blank\">The study<\/a>, titled \u2018Evidence on vaping e-cigarettes as a risk factor for cancer: A systematic review\u2019, was published in the Journal of Cancer Policy before being withdrawn by the journal\u2019s editor-in-chief.&nbsp;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>According to the journal\u2019s retraction notice, the decision followed an investigation into the paper\u2019s research methods and conclusions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Editors said: \u201cFollowing publication, substantial concerns were raised regarding the methodological integrity, accuracy, and scientific validity of the review.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>A subsequent evaluation identified \u201cmultiple serious flaws that materially affect the reliability of the findings and conclusions.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Problems with methodology and data<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p>The retraction notice lists several issues that undermined confidence in the paper\u2019s analysis. Among the problems identified were \u201cundisclosed deviations from the registered and published protocol,\u201d including changes to eligibility criteria, study designs and comparator groups that were not transparently reported.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Editors also flagged \u201cinconsistencies between the reported search strategy and the studies ultimately included,\u201dwhich they said undermined the reproducibility and traceability of the research.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Further concerns included \u201cmisclassification of study designs, including the categorisation of biomarker and cross-sectional studies as cancer incidence studies.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The evaluation also found the paper included \u201ca study that had previously been retracted,\u201d while reporting \u201cinternal contradictions and numerical discrepancies in reported study counts, sample sizes, and outcome data.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Conclusions judged unreliable<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p>Because of these issues, the journal concluded that the findings could not be relied upon.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The retraction notice states that \u201cconclusions that are not supported by the heterogenous and methodologically limited evidence presented\u201d were also identified in the paper.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Editors said the scale of the problems ultimately meant the analysis could not stand. The notice states: \u201cCollectively, these issues compromise the transparency, coherence, and scientific rigor of the review.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>It adds that \u201cthe extent and nature of the errors prevent confidence in the validity of the analyses and conclusions.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Authors did not respond<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p>According to the journal, the editor contacted the authors to request an explanation. However, the retraction notice says the researchers did not reply within the allotted timeframe.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>It states: \u201cAlthough the authors were given an opportunity to respond to the concerns within the allotted timeframe, they did not submit a reply.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>As a result, the editor-in-chief decided the article could no longer remain in the scientific record. The journal concluded the paper \u201cdoes not meet the standards of scientific accuracy and reliability required for publication and must therefore be retracted.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Journal apologises to readers<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p>The publisher also acknowledged that the problems had not been detected during peer review.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The notice states: \u201cApologies are offered to the readers of the journal that this was not detected during the submission and publication process.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The retraction highlights the importance of methodological transparency and rigorous review in studies examining the health effects of nicotine products.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Another vaping study recently withdrawn<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Study linking vaping to stroke withdrawn in January<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p>The retraction also follows another high-profile vaping paper that was withdrawn earlier this year.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>In January, a 2022 <a href=\"https:\/\/clearingtheair.eu\/en\/post\/study-linking-vaping-to-stroke-retracted-over-major-errors-in-analysis\/\">study<\/a> linking vaping to stroke was retracted after the journal identified \u201cseveral major errors in the data analysis.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>According to the report, reviewers found problems including \u201cimpossible sample sizes,\u201d uncertainty over whether vaping occurred before stroke, and extremely small numbers of stroke cases among people who used vapes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The decision removed a widely cited claim that vaping increased stroke risk and highlighted the importance of rigorous analysis in research on nicotine products.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><\/p>\n<div class=\"clear-after-content-2\" style=\"margin-top: 20px;margin-bottom: 20px;margin-left: auto;margin-right: auto;text-align: center;\" id=\"clear-1552477728\"><img src=\"https:\/\/clearingtheair.eu\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/caafc5c68900198b80aee12c11b50184.avif\" alt=\"\"   style=\"display: inline-block;\" \/><\/div>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>A scientific paper examining whether vaping may increase the risk of cancer has been formally retracted after editors identified serious methodological problems. The study, titled \u2018Evidence on vaping e-cigarettes as a risk factor for cancer: A systematic review\u2019, was published in the&hellip;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":990002,"featured_media":35363,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[257,259],"tags":[27,186],"slider":[],"class_list":["post-35362","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-news","category-science","tag-article","tag-nicotine"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/clearingtheair.eu\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/35362","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/clearingtheair.eu\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/clearingtheair.eu\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/clearingtheair.eu\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/990002"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/clearingtheair.eu\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=35362"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/clearingtheair.eu\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/35362\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":35370,"href":"https:\/\/clearingtheair.eu\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/35362\/revisions\/35370"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/clearingtheair.eu\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/35363"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/clearingtheair.eu\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=35362"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/clearingtheair.eu\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=35362"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/clearingtheair.eu\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=35362"},{"taxonomy":"slider","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/clearingtheair.eu\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/slider?post=35362"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}