A senior scientist who helped shape research at Tampa’s H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center has stepped away from a key leadership post after questions surfaced about several older studies she co-authored while working at a Texas cancer center. Journals and outside researchers flagged potential problems with images in some of those papers, prompting at least one formal retraction and an editorial expression of concern. The move pulls a top research figure out of day-to-day oversight while those reviews play out.
Reported resignation
The resignation first came to light yesterday, when the Tampa Bay Times reported that Elsa Flores had stepped down from a leadership role at Moffitt. According to the Times, the decision followed a review of studies Flores worked on at a Texas cancer center, where scientists had raised concerns that some published images may have been altered.
Flores’ role at Moffitt
Flores is not a bit player in Moffitt’s research operation. Her institutional profile lists Elsa R. Flores as an associate center director and a senior member in the Department of Molecular Oncology, positions that place her squarely in the basic-science leadership structure at the Tampa institute, according to Moffitt Cancer Center. The profile outlines her responsibilities leading a research lab and overseeing program initiatives.
What journals have done
Concerns about the older work have already produced visible ripples in the literature. In 2024, Nature issued an editorial expression of concern about a 2002 paper co-authored by Flores, citing questions about image integrity and warning readers that the reliability of some data was under review. An earlier editor’s note and the later expression of concern together show that the issues trace back years in the scientific record.
In a separate case, PLOS Genetics retracted a 2009 paper co-authored by Flores in March 2023. Editors concluded that multiple figure panels “appear more similar than would be expected” and noted that original uncropped images were not available. According to the retraction notice, Flores did not agree with the journal’s decision.
Community scrutiny and timeline
The concerns did not emerge overnight. Over recent years, researchers have hashed over multiple Flores-linked papers in public comment threads, while watchdog coverage tracked the mounting questions. The site For Better Science has pulled together a chronology of those discussions, highlighting critics’ claims of recurring image similarities that eventually drew notice from journals and institutions.
When image-integrity questions land on editors’ desks, institutions are generally expected to run their own reviews, pull original datasets, and coordinate with journals on possible corrections or retractions. Those steps, and the range of potential outcomes, are laid out in guidance on research integrity from the National Academies…