Top Cancer Doctor Accused of Fraud in Paper Mill Scandal
A prominent Chinese medical oncologist and newly elected academician has been accused of systematic academic fraud after an independent science blogger uncovered evidence of duplicated images across multiple research papers, raising suspicions that his teams may have purchased fabricated data from illicit “paper mills.”
Xu Ruihua, director of Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center and president of its affiliated hospital, was elected to the Chinese Academy of Engineering in 2025. The allegations, published July 14 by the blogger known as Geng Tongxue (“Classmate Geng”), center on pixel-level image matches in papers spanning nearly a decade, according to Caixin Global.
The Allegations
Geng Tongxue’s video analysis identified duplicated Western blot bands and cell experiment images across at least five papers published between 2013 and 2021. The core evidence involves Figure 6A of a June 2013 paper in the Journal of Hematology & Oncology, where Western blot bands showed identical outlines, positions, and background noise patterns after mirroring — a level of matching that experts say cannot occur by chance.
The same images reappeared in a 2017 paper in Cell Death & Disease by Xu’s team, a May 2018 paper in the International Journal of Oncology by Li Zeng’s team at Xi’an Jiaotong University, a February 2019 paper in Cell Death & Disease by Peng Gang’s team at Huazhong University of Science and Technology, and a December 2021 paper in Molecular Cancer by Xu’s team, as reported by Sohu.
The Paper Mill Hypothesis
Because the 2018 and 2019 papers have no overlapping authors with Xu’s team and originate from independent institutions, Geng argued that internal data sharing is unlikely. The more plausible explanation, he contends, is that all papers purchased fabricated data from a shared asset library operated by a third-party paper mill.
Geng presented two possible scenarios: “chain theft,” where each paper successively stole data from earlier ones, or a common paper mill source. He argued the latter is more likely given the institutional independence of the research groups involved. The presence of distinctive “props” — including a ruler with identical scratches and a tablecloth with matching patterns — across papers from many different Chinese institutions further supports this hypothesis, Geng said.
Broader Context: China’s Paper Mill Industry
The allegations come amid a government crackdown on academic fraud. In February 2026, the National Health Commission launched a three-year campaign specifically targeting paper mills and fake research in the biomedical field, with penalties including a lifetime ban from state-funded research for individuals who purchase papers or fabricate data.
An undercover investigation by Red Star News in October 2025 revealed the scale of the problem. Reporters infiltrated two Chongqing-based paper mill companies that claimed to have facilitated the publication of 130,000 papers in a single year, with annual revenue exceeding 80 million yuan (~$11 million USD). Both companies had their business licenses revoked in February 2026 following the investigation, as Red Star News reported.
Geng Tongxue: A Rising Watchdog
Geng Tongxue, a former PhD student who now operates a science communication account, has gained prominence in 2026 for exposing academic misconduct by multiple high-profile Chinese researchers. His methods involve using computer programs to compare images across papers — a technique he describes as “not particularly complex.”
In May 2026, Xinhua News Agency published a major feature on Geng, asking: “Why has ‘Geng Tongxue’ shaken the entire internet?” The article noted that Geng’s work highlights failures in the institutional academic oversight system, where universities, journals, and funding agencies have failed to detect obvious fraud. “Academic integrity enforcement cannot always rely on online bloggers to ‘dig up landmines,’” Xinhua commented.
Prior to targeting Xu, Geng raised concerns about Zhong Nanshan, the prominent respiratory disease expert, and Song Erwei, dean of Sun Yat-sen University’s medical school and a member of the Chinese Academy of Sciences.
Questions of Accountability
As corresponding author on multiple papers, Xu Ruihua bears ultimate responsibility for the integrity of research published under his name. The allegations raise questions about whether Xu personally participated in fraud or failed to adequately supervise his research teams. Additionally, cell lines BGC-823 and SGC-7901 used in the 2013 study have been confirmed by Cellosaurus to have HeLa contamination, raising further concerns about experimental rigor.
Caixin’s calls to the public relations departments of the Chinese Academy of Engineering and Sun Yat-sen University went unanswered as of publication.
What’s Next
The case has ignited widespread debate about the integrity of Chinese medical research and the effectiveness of institutional oversight. Geng Tongxue has raised pointed questions about the use of public research funding, asking in his video: “Was this research funding actually spent or not? Who paid for the purchased papers? Were there invoices? Were the invoices reimbursed?”
With the National Health Commission’s three-year anti-fraud campaign underway and public attention focused on the issue, the pressure is mounting on Chinese academic institutions to demonstrate that their internal oversight mechanisms can match the scrutiny of independent watchdogs.