RETRACTION: Reduction of Nuclear Y654-p-β-Catenin Expression Through SH3GL2-Meditated Downregulation of EGFR in Chemotolerance TNBC: Clinical and Prognostic Importance.

Retraction: S. Islam, H. Dasgupta, M. Basu, A. Roy, N. Alam, S. Roychoudhury, C. K. Panda, "Reduction of Nuclear Y654-p-β-Catenin Expression Through SH3GL2-Meditated Downregulation of EGFR in Chemotolerance TNBC: Clinical and Prognostic Importance," Journal of Cellular Physiology 235, no. 11 (2020): 8114-8128. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcp.29466. The above article, published online on 20 January 2020, in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com), and has been retracted by agreement between the journal Editor-in-Chief, Robert Heath; and Wiley Periodicals LLC. The journal received notice of concerns from a third party regarding duplications and rotation of images between Figures 2 C and 2 G in this article as well as concerns that Figures 2 F and 3 C had been re-used in a different article by some of the same authors (Islam, et al. 2020 [https://doi.org/10.1007/s13402-020-00525-5]). Additional investigation by the publisher also confirmed image duplications within Figure 4 F and between Supplementary Figures 1 C and 1 F in this article. In response to an inquiry by the publisher, the authors stated that the duplication between figures 2 C and 2 G was due to the fact that serial sections of tissue were analyzed. The authors acknowledged that the same samples had been used between this article and the article published in a different journal, but reported that they had mislabeled the samples in the other article. Lastly, the authors stated that the duplications in Figure 4 F and between Supplementary Figures 1 C and 1 F were caused by a mistake during figure preparation. The parties agree that the explanation does not account for the multiple duplications and rotations of images both within this article and between this article and the article published in another journal. The parties also agree that the original data as provided does not adequately support the authors' explanation. The retraction has been agreed to because the evidence of image duplication and manipulation fundamentally compromises the conclusions presented in the article. The authors disagree with the retraction.