Cancer Treatment Reviews

3.0k papers and 149.7k indexed citations i.

About

The 3.0k papers published in Cancer Treatment Reviews in the last decades have received a total of 149.7k indexed citations. Papers published in Cancer Treatment Reviews usually cover Oncology (1.7k papers), Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine (907 papers) and Molecular Biology (731 papers) specifically the topics of Cancer Treatment and Pharmacology (311 papers), HER2/EGFR in Cancer Research (251 papers) and Lung Cancer Treatments and Mutations (246 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Cancer Treatment Reviews are Robert E. Coleman, Donald C. McMillan, Razelle Kurzrock, Min Li‐Weber, Peter Kaatsch, Cara A. Rabik, M. Eileen Dolan, Stephen K. Carter, Roy A. Patchell and Dietmar W. Siemann.

In The Last Decade

Fields of papers published in Cancer Treatment Reviews

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers published in Cancer Treatment Reviews. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the papers published in Cancer Treatment Reviews.

Countries where authors publish in Cancer Treatment Reviews

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Cancer Treatment Reviews. It shows the number of citations coming from papers published by authors working in each country. You can also color the map by specialization and compare the number of citations received by papers published in Cancer Treatment Reviews with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Cancer Treatment Reviews more than expected).

Rankless uses publication and citation data sourced from OpenAlex, an open and comprehensive bibliographic database. While OpenAlex provides broad and valuable coverage of the global research landscape, it—like all bibliographic datasets—has inherent limitations. These include incomplete records, variations in author disambiguation, differences in journal indexing, and delays in data updates. As a result, some metrics and network relationships displayed in Rankless may not fully capture the entirety of a scholar’s output or impact.

Explore journals with similar magnitude of impact

Rankless by CCL
2025