I'd call it more than "disappointing", that would be fraud if true. And let's not forget how disgusting it would be stealing the fame from a young Ph.D. candida

I'd call it more than "disappointing", that would be fraud if true. And let's not forget how disgusting it would be stealing the fame from a young Ph.D. candidate for whom this could have been the kickstarting of a successful career. >Several independent scientists consulted about the case by Science agreed the Scientific Reports paper contains suspicious irregularities, and most were surprised that the paper—which they note contains typos, unresolved proofreader’s notes, and several basic notation errors—was published in the first place. Although they stopped short of saying the irregularities clearly point to fraud, most—but not all—said they are so concerning that DePalma’s team must come up with the raw data behind its analyses if team members want to clear themselves. Sadly this "surprised it got published" story is all too common. There's a real issue with quantity over quality in science publishing.