In 1998, Nicholas Gonzalez, M.D. received National Cancer Institute approval for a clinical trial to evaluate his nutritional-enzyme approach in the treatment of patients with pancreatic cancer. Though Dr. Gonzalez hoped the venture would initiate an era of cooperation between conventional scientists and serious alternative researchers, problems plagued the study from its beginning. The design discouraged patient participation; conventional oncologists discouraged patients from joining and at times pressured those already admitted for nutritional therapy to change to more conventional treatment. Then in 2000 the NCI insisted that all patient selection decisions be turned over to the Principal Investigator, who as it turned out helped develop the chemotherapy protocol used as the control treatment.Repeatedly, the Principal Investigator approved patients for the nutritional treatment who did not meet the entry requirements, or who were too ill or uncommitted to follow the self-administered regimen. An evaluation by government scientists in early 2005 confirmed that so many patients had failed to follow the prescribed nutritional therapy that the data had little meaning. Despite such problems, without Dr. Gonzalez¿ knowledge the Principal Investigator published an article implying the study was properly run, patients complied fully and that the nutritional therapy had no effect.In response, Dr. Gonzalez, a former journalist, has written What Went Wrong, to bring the truth of this project to light, and show how bias, indifference, and at times incompetence undermined a promising research effort that, if properly run, might have ushered in a new direction in cancer treatment.