Does "corroborate" in a scientific context imply confirmation rather "either confirmation or rejection" of findings from previous studies?

OED defines corroborate:

to provide evidence or information that supports a statement, theory, etc.

By this definition, corroborate means that it supports the existing theory. It cannot mean that it rejects the existing theory.

Here is where it gets tricky. If the existing statement rejected an idea (say, that Corona beer transmits the coronavirus), then a new study could corroborate this rejection.

Corroboration also works for rejecting hypotheses. Say an existing study rejects a null hypothesis (which is a good thing in scientific circles). A new study that also rejects the same null hypothesis will be said to be corroborating both the existing study and the rejection.