Well, considering that Amgen could only reproduce 11% of "landmark" papers in cancer research, peer review is missing a lot. See "Drug development: Raise standards for preclinical cancer research" http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v483/n7391/full/483531a...

And some of the scientists insisted on non-disclosure agreement before agreeing to help Amgen reproduce published results, which proves most papers don't publish nearly enough details to reproduce main results.

Peer review is a social organization that necessarily never lives up to its ideals. At top journals such as Science, Nature, Cell, editors also consider PR values, popularity of topics, exclusivity. It is standard practice to obtain prior favorable impression by contacting editors before formally submitting manuscripts at these places. There are different standards of peer review; consortium such as ENCODE and TCGA have a different track for their papers.