In 2024, many authors make outstanding contributions to our journal. Their articles published with us have received very well feedback in the field and stimulate a lot of discussions and new insights among the peers.

Hereby, we would like to highlight some of our outstanding authors, with a brief interview of their thoughts and insights as authors. Allow us to express our heartfelt gratitude for their tremendous effort and valuable contributions to the scientific process.

Outstanding Authors (2024)

Kota Iwahori, Osaka University, Japan

Ali Sadoughi, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, USA

Nobukazu Fujimot, Okayama Rosai Hospital, Japan

Mau Ern Poh, University of Malaya, Malaysia

Rachael Helen Dodd, The Daffodil Centre, Australia

Carl G. Maki, Rush University Medical Center, USA

Palma Fedele, Dario Camberlingo Hospital, Italy

Nobuyuki Horita, Yokohama City University, Japan

Jung Seop Eom, Pusan National University Hospital, Korea

Dariusz C. Gorecki, The University of Portsmouth, UK

Yusuke Inoue, Hamamatsu University School of Medicine, Japan

Takehito Shukuya, Juntendo University, Japan

Gabriela Krakorova, Charles University, Czech Republic

Da Hyun Kang, Chungnam National University Hospital, South Korea

Victor Moreno, Fundación Jiménez Díaz University Hospital, Spain

Hirokazu Taniguchi, Nagasaki University Hospital, Japan

Gaspard Naulleau, Centre Hospitalier Intercommunal de Créteil, France

Hiroyuki Inoue, Fukuoka University, Japan

Marcel Kemper, The University Hospital of Muenster, Germany

Outstanding Author

Kota Iwahori

Kota Iwahori, MD, PhD, is a Specially Appointed Associate Professor of the Department of Clinical Research in Tumor Immunology at the Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka University, Japan. He received his MD and PhD from the Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka University. He completed his pulmonary medicine residency and fellowship at the Osaka University Hospital. He investigated T-cell therapy of cancer as a research associate at the Center for Cell and Gene Therapy, Baylor College of Medicine, USA. He has focused on developing predictive biomarkers and novel therapeutics for cancer immunotherapy. His recent projects include peripheral T cell cytotoxicity as a predictive biomarker of immune checkpoint inhibitors, and cancer immunotherapy based on the mechanism of T cell activation induced by tetracyclines. His team found tetracyclines enhanced T-cell activity and conducted a clinical trial to investigate the efficacy and safety of tetracycline in patients with COVID-19.

One of Dr. Iwahori’s focuses is translating basic research to the clinic. He points out that academic writing will provide opportunities for collaboration with other researchers. Specifically, his team is collaborating with researchers in the United States who read their paper on peripheral T cell cytotoxicity as a predictive biomarker of immune checkpoint inhibitors.

Dr. Iwahori thinks it is important for an author to clarify the positioning of the research in the future direction. It will be critical for an author to tell readers what the research is for. It will promote the research to translate into the clinic. In his experience, his team published a paper on the clinical trial to investigate the efficacy and safety of tetracycline in patients with COVID-19 based on their findings of T cell activation enhanced by tetracyclines. As a result, the paper showed evidence of their findings in the clinical trial. They are currently developing novel immunotherapy based on the mechanism of action of tetracyclines.

“The motivation to translate research into the clinic has led me to write papers in this field,” says Dr. Iwahori.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Ali Sadoughi

Dr. Ali Sadoughi is an Associate Professor of Medicine and Director of Interventional Pulmonology and Bronchoscopy at Albert Einstein College of Medicine - Montefiore Medical Center in New York City, USA. His research focuses on the development and application of advanced technologies for minimally invasive diagnosis and treatment of lung cancer. His studies in peripheral airway bronchoscopy have helped the pulmonologists and the engineers in this field to step up the efforts in diagnosing lung cancer and better profiling its tissue when it is still in its early stages. He has explored the utilization of ultrathin bronchoscopy plus intraprocedural 3D scanning and used new ideas in virtual and real-time bronchoscopy platforms such as robotic bronchoscopy. His techniques enabled him to explore for the first time the utilization of particle-based radiation treatment in the lung and mediastinum which is expected to open a new line of treatment in lung cancer via bronchoscopy. Connect with him on LinkedIn and Twitter.

Dr. Sadoughi states that a good academic paper is an honest presentation of scientific questions and how authors helped answer them. Besides, research methods and ethical considerations are crucial components of any valid scholarly paper. From his perspective, academic papers are a reflection of tremendous efforts by scientists and academicians. They clarify the authors’ knowledge at the current time and document it for future reference. For this purpose, academic papers should be flawless, so they can be trusted and be used as a base for further studies.

“While scholarly writing may not always be easy, it is indeed a rewarding experience. Academic papers serve as medals of appreciation, reflecting your contributions to the academic community,” Dr. Sadoughi says.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Nobukazu Fujimot

Dr. Nobukazu Fujimot graduated from Okayama University Medical School in 1994 and was a research member of the Saitama Cancer Center in Japan during 2000-2001. He was a Postdoctoral Fellow of the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Department of Thoracic / Head and Neck Medical Oncology during 2003-2006. Nowadays, he is a manger of both the Department of Pulmonary Medicine and the Department of Medical Oncology in Okayama Rosai Hospital. His research area is the diagnosis and treatment of thoracic cancers such as lung cancer and pleural mesothelioma, and he has been focusing on developing novel treatments for pleural mesothelioma for several years.

As an author, Dr. Fujimot points out that authors experience some cases of unusual clinical presentation or clinical course during the usual clinical practice. When it happens, they try to research similar cases online. If there are many previous reports, they draw on their experiences for the management of the patient. If there are few previous reports, they get excited and decide to publish because they can discuss various critiques through the review process, and once published, they believe they can help some future patients and physicians in the world.

“An author should possess honesty and sincerity based on a certain level of knowledge in the area of his/her research,” Dr. Fujimot says.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Mau Ern Poh

Dr. Mau Ern Poh is an Associate Professor of Medicine at the Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. He is also an internal medicine physician and pulmonologist serving at the University Malaya Medical Centre, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. He completed his primary medical training at the University of Malaya and attained his Membership in the Royal College of Physicians (MRCP) in 2011. He completed his national respiratory medicine fellowship in 2016. He then underwent further training in interventional pulmonology, lung cancer and lung transplant at the Freeman Hospital, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, UK. He completed the British Specialty Certificate Examination in Respiratory Medicine in 2017. He was awarded the best lecturer award by the Faculty of Medicine, University of Malaya in 2018 and was made a fellow of the Royal College of Physicians, London, UK in 2020. He is also a fellow of the American College of Chest Physicians and the Asian Pacific Society of Respirology. Dr. Poh’s research interests include lung cancer, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and bronchiectasis. His research works have been published in various international peer-reviewed journals.

Dr. Poh believes a good academic paper should be novel, starting with an observation of a clinical problem or gaps in clinical practice; or a lack of understanding in a particular studied field. Following this, a research question and hypothesis are formulated, not simply to address the clinical problem observed, but to guide the development of fresh ideas, introduce novel methodologies, and produce findings that significantly enhance and contribute to the existing canvas of knowledge. The academic paper should then prompt scholars to build on current limitations and prompt future investigations and research that would potentially lead to more discoveries. These findings can then be applied to clinical medicine, to transform the existing body of knowledge, to produce a greater contribution in the studied field, for example, to increase the survival of patients suffering from lung cancer. In short, a good academic paper is not only a publication of interesting findings but also one that embodies translational medicine, bringing benefit to the community as a whole by advancing patient care.

To ensure that one’s writing is up-to-date, Dr. Poh indicates that it is important to maintain a passion for reading and learning from mentors. By reading extensively, one is able to critically reflect on the limitations and gaps in clinical practice and current literature, thereby using these as a springboard to conduct research to address these gaps. Staying humble and asking for directions from mentors or leaders in the field is also crucial as they have gleaned more experiences and insights, having been further down the road of research. As a clinician who has to balance busy clinical duties and teaching, one wonders if there is any time to do any research or writing at all, let alone to provide any new insights into the field of research. As such, one way to do so is to incorporate data collection and audits into day-to-day clinical practice, thereby weaving research into clinical practice. Research then becomes the bedrock of clinical practice, which can be used to produce better evidence-based care. These findings are also able to provide important real-world evidence that cannot be produced through randomized clinical trials.

“When I first started writing as a novice, I felt the task to be difficult and I was unsure if any of my work would eventually be published. Fortunately, with the support and encouragement from mentors, their research interests and writings started to grow on me, and I developed a sense of joy seeing my work being published over time. I also began to accept that rejections by journals can be seen as opportunities to meticulously correct, improve and fine-tune the academic paper further so that it is of the highest quality when it is finally accepted. Over time, I was able to publish in more reputable journals, such as the Translational Lung Cancer Research, which aligns directly with my research interest and allows the dissemination of my research findings to a broader audience,” Dr. Poh says.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Rachael Helen Dodd

Dr. Rachael Dodd is a Senior Research Fellow at The Daffodil Centre, a joint venture between The University of Sydney and Cancer Council NSW. She received her PhD in Psychology from University College London, UK. Her research program focuses on the behavioral and implementation aspects of healthcare communication. She works in healthcare communication and health literacy with a focus on patients diagnosed with HPV-related head and neck cancer, and people eligible for cervical screening and her most recent projects focus on the implementation of lung cancer screening in Australia.

According to Dr. Dodd, a high-quality academic paper is characterized by coherent writing, clear and strong justification for the study, and can recognize both the strengths and limitations of the study. It is also crucial to address the implications of research in the current landscape and be clear about how the research will progress in the field.

Dr. Dodd points out that authors should consider the likely readers, which may consist of specialists in a particular field, and should not make assumptions about the readers' knowledge. She adds, “Always consider that anyone, from any field could read the paper and write it with that in mind.”

To all researchers who are devoting themselves to academic writing, Dr. Dodd says, “Keep up the great work! It can sometimes feel like a long process getting to the results and write-up stages of your research projects but always keep in mind the importance of your work and remind yourself of the reasons you do what you do. It always helps to ground me.”

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Carl G. Maki

Carl G. Maki is a Professor in the Department of Anatomy and Cell Biology at Rush University Medical Center in Chicago. The main focus of his lab at present is identifying mechanisms of resistance to targeted therapies in cancer and molecular markers that can predict responses to treatment. Dr. Maki and his team also have a long-standing study in p53 and how its dysregulation contributes to cancer. In one of their current projects, they identified a drug combination that appears most active against p53 mutated or deleted cancers, and they are examining how this drug combination works. In another project, they identified a gene signature that is associated with the sensitivity of lung and breast cancer cells to spindle checkpoint inhibitors. They are exploring how the factors encoded by these genes regulate response, and if the gene signature can predict response in treated tumors.

Dr. Maki indicates that a good academic paper should cite some of the original findings in the field and give a brief history of the topic, even if it is just a paragraph or two. That way readers can understand how the question in the current paper arose and why the experiments are being done.

To Dr. Maki, sometimes there may be two papers in the field that are inconsistent with each other. He thinks one needs to believe or consider that the findings made in both papers are true, but the inconsistencies may be due to a specific experimental condition (e.g. different cell lines were used). If a consensus starts to form that supports one view over the other, one nonetheless needs to keep in mind that there are at least some papers out there that hold an opposing view.

“Read as much as you can, including the complete introduction and discussion sections of papers (sometimes people will look only through the results and data sections). Consult with physicians to find out what are the most pressing clinical issues,” Dr. Maki says.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Palma Fedele

Dr. Palma Fedele is a highly esteemed oncologist renowned for her impactful contributions to cancer care and leadership in the medical field. With over twenty years of experience, she has held prestigious roles such as Director of Oncology at Hospital "D. Camberlingo" in Francavilla Fontana, Brindisi, where she has spearheaded the establishment and management of various oncology programs. Dr. Fedele's expertise extends to medical education and professional organizations, supported by her extensive educational background in oncology, management, and a Master's degree in Senology. Actively engaged in national and international scientific societies, she demonstrates a commitment to advancing oncology research through participation in clinical trials and authoring peer-reviewed papers in prestigious journals. Her research focuses on innovative therapeutic strategies and advancements in breast cancer, lung cancer, hepatocellular carcinoma, and other malignancies, reflecting her dedication to enhancing patient outcomes in oncology. Connect with her on LinkedIn.

Dr. Fedele considers the following as the most commonly encountered difficulties in academic writing: clarity and coherence of ideas, proper citation and referencing, maintaining academic language and tone, time management, and effective revision and editing.

In Dr. Fedele’s opinion, when selecting evidence for academic writing, authors should prioritize relevance, credibility, diversity, currency, and consistency. Authors must critically evaluate each piece of evidence, integrate it smoothly into the narrative, offer insightful interpretations, and strive for originality in their analysis. By following these guidelines, authors can effectively synthesize evidence and contribute to the advancement of knowledge in their field.

“I choose to publish in Translational Lung Cancer Research due to its focus on bridging basic science and clinical practice in lung cancer research. The journal offers a platform for sharing cutting-edge findings, its reputation within the field, rigorous peer review, a high impact factor, and a broad readership among researchers, clinicians, and policymakers interested in advancements in lung cancer treatment and care,” Dr. Fedele says.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Nobuyuki Horita

Dr. Nobuyuki Horita graduated from Yokohama City University Medical School in 2005. After serving as a visiting fellow at the National Institute of Health, he became the Director of the Chemotherapy Center at Yokohama City University Hospital. His primary research focus is general clinical research, particularly systematic review and meta-analysis. Recent advancements in cancer treatment have significantly improved patient life expectancy. Although the primary goal of chemotherapy is to extend life, the use of prolonged overall survival (OS) has led researchers to favor other endpoints such as objective response rate (ORR), disease control (DC), and progression-free survival (PFS). Dr. Horita's research is dedicated to examining whether these surrogate endpoints can effectively replace OS in clinical trials. He has also conducted numerous studies on non-malignant diseases and has contributed to the development of many clinical guidelines in Japan.

Dr. Horita thinks that doctors can discover effective and safe treatments and diagnostics to deliver to patients through engaging in academic research. In addition, by using academic writing, they can disseminate their research findings worldwide, promoting better research through discussions with other researchers.

From Dr. Horita’s perspective, the important qualities in research include a deep interest and curiosity in new knowledge and technologies, the ability to analyze data and draw logical conclusions, the resilience to overcome unexpected challenges, communication skills both orally and in writing, a high ethical standard, the ability to collaborate with other researchers and technical staff, flexibility to adapt to changes in information and technology, and a continual desire to learn about the latest research and technologies.

“To use time efficiently as a researcher, consider the following tips: Every task has a different level of importance. Start with tasks that are both important and urgent. Maintain a clear plan to use time efficiently. Utilize appropriate digital tools to facilitate the organization and sharing of information,” Dr. Horita says.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Jung Seop Eom

Dr. Jung Seop Eom serves as the Head of the Lung Cancer Center at Pusan National University Hospital and an Associate Professor of Internal Medicine at Pusan National University School of Medicine. His research focuses on personalized treatment for patients with oncogenic drivers and strategies for enhancing outcomes in the treatment of early-stage lung cancer.

Dr. Eom believes the impact factor of a research journal is not the sole determinant of its importance. What matters is the quality and relevance of the research content, especially its potential to improve clinical practice and directly impact patient care. Basically, the value of research lies in its ability to contribute meaningfully to advancements in healthcare and the well-being of patients.

Academic writing takes a lot of time and effort. To Dr. Eom, the motivation to engage in academic writing, despite its time and effort demands, stems from his belief that the findings and insights derived from research can directly benefit patient care and enhance clinical outcomes. This motivation resonates with all other academic writers, inspiring them to conduct further research. Ultimately, the opportunity to make a tangible difference in the lives of individuals receiving medical care serves as a constant source of inspiration and motivation throughout the academic writing process.

Speaking of how to ensure that his writing is critical, Dr. Eom says, “When writing about lung cancer research, it is crucial to question assumptions, evaluate evidence rigorously, construct compelling arguments, consider diverse perspectives, and seek feedback. By doing so, we can produce literature that contributes meaningfully to our understanding of lung cancer and helps improve patient outcomes.”

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Dariusz C. Gorecki

Dariusz C. Górecki, MD, PhD, is a Professor of Molecular Medicine at the University of Portsmouth, UK. Being a graduate of the Warsaw Medical School, Poland, Prof. Górecki was a Wellcome Trust European Fellow at Cambridge University Medical School, Wellcome Research Career Development Fellow at University College London, and Fulbright Distinguished Scholar at Harvard Medical School. He focuses on Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD), particularly unraveling its molecular mechanisms to find novel therapeutic targets. His team discovered the P2X7 receptor as one such target. He described, for the first time, the distribution of individual DMD gene transcripts in the brain, and identified the cerebellar Purkinje neuron-specific dystrophin promoter. His team discovered that DMD affects myoblasts, thus revealing a vicious cycle of dystrophic pathology. In recent studies, his team demonstrated that the levels of specific DMD gene transcripts can be a biomarker for predicting patient survival in different types of tumors.

Prof. Górecki believes academic papers stand as the most enduring and verifiable records of authors’ research and intellectual contributions. They enable others to assess, replicate, and build upon their work, thus propelling the advancement of existing knowledge.

Speaking of how to ensure one’s writing is critical, Prof. Górecki explains, “In academic writing, like in making a sandwich, one adheres to a dry and established structure, but the creation itself should not be dry. Writing must ensure the thorough and credible presentation of information, satisfying experts in the field while maintaining sufficient background and accessibility to appeal to a broader audience.”

（by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Yusuke Inoue

Dr. Yusuke Inoue is an Assistant Professor at the Second Division, Department of Internal Medicine, Hamamatsu University School of Medicine, Hamamatsu, Japan. In 2005, he obtained an M.D. from Kobe University School of Medicine in Kobe, Japan. In 2017, he attained a Ph.D. from Hamamatsu University School of Medicine in Hamamatsu, Japan. From 2017 to 2020, he served as a Postdoctoral Fellow at the BC Cancer Research Centre in the Department of Integrative Oncology, located in Vancouver, Canada. His research areas are clinical, translational, and basic research of non-small cell lung cancer and small cell lung cancer.

Dr. Inoue thinks that a good academic paper provides a novel scientific basis justified by sound methodologies and contributes to the development of subsequent research to solve an important problem in the field. He believes that a research should be inspired by relevant clinical questions to advance medical knowledge and improve patient care. During the preparation of a paper to address them, he points out that clarity, conciseness, consistency, and appropriate interpretation of the results are important. Additionally, authors should recognize and document the limitations along with the strengths of the paper to facilitate readers’ understanding.

“Recent breakthroughs in developing novel therapeutic strategies in lung cancer have dramatically improved patients’ outcomes. These fascinating aspects have inspired me to conduct research on this disease to contribute to further understanding of its biology and improvement of patients’ care. Although academic writing requires much time and effort, I am motivated because it is critically important not only as a source of evaluation for researchers but also as a reliable platform for publishing research results and as a forum for communication with peers in the field worldwide,” says Dr. Inoue.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Takehito Shukuya

Dr. Takehito Shukuya is an Associate Professor at the Department of Respiratory Medicine at Juntendo University. He obtained his M.D. from Yamanashi Medical College in March 2002 and got his Ph.D. from Juntendo University in March 2012. From 2022 till now, he has been a Member of the Health Insurance Committee at the Japanese Society of Medical Oncology and the Programme Committee at the Japanese Society of Medical Oncology. He is also the Editor of BMC Cancer. His publications can be assessed here.

Dr. Shukuya regards a paper that influences the course/selection of treatment in clinical practice as a good paper for medical professionals. As for basic research, a good paper is one that elucidates the mechanism from various angles, which gives a sense of its potential for future medicine.

In Dr. Shukuya’s opinion, there is no doubt that study design is the first step to avoiding biases in writing. In a clinical article, a randomized phase III trial would ultimately be a good choice. More recently, adjustment methods using propensity scores that align with patients' backgrounds may also be a good option for a real-world study. Even in retrospective studies, it would be possible to reduce bias as much as possible by specifying in advance the type of analysis to be performed. In addition, it is a good idea to look back each time when authors write a paper to ensure that they are not being overly subjective.

“Sometimes your research succeeds, and sometimes it fails. Nevertheless, don't be discouraged and keep moving forward, sometimes taking a break, with the goal of improving the quality of life and prognosis of your patients. Aim for a future in which you will one day overcome thoracic malignancies,” says Dr. Shukuya.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Gabriela Krakorova

Gabriela Krakorova, MD, PhD, whose alma mater is Charles University, is a specialist in pneumology and clinical oncology. She has been involved in lung cancer management for many years, and is the author or co-author of a number of publications, at both domestic and international level. At the present time, she focuses mainly on the quality of care for cancer patients. She believes that good outcomes of cancer care result from high adherence not only to therapeutic but also to diagnostic guidelines. Cooperating with colleagues from large oncology centers from all over the Czech Republic, with the LUCAS project and especially with Petr Domecký, she has the piece of work "Omission of Staging PET/CT Linked to Reduced Survival in Stage III NSCLC: Insights from the LUCAS Project Real-World Data" created and published in TLCR.

The creation of a good scientific publication, according to Dr. Krakorova, is a very demanding process. The publication must bring new knowledge and be well prepared, so careful study of the literature is necessary. The work must have clearly defined goals. In addition to valuable own data, and their evaluation, it must contain, among other things, correctly processed citations, and references. After writing a scientific paper, it is also difficult to find a quality-impacted journal that would be willing to print a scientific publication. These journals have a rigorous peer-review process and a high rejection rate. Reviewers often have a large number of requests for modifications and corrections, and this can be time-consuming and frustrating. To her, the review process was the most difficult part of all. She adds, “When preparing my scientific work and review comments, I was inspired by the great scientific efforts of the previous head, Prof. Miloš Pešek and the current head Assoc. Prof. Martin Svatoň of the department where I have been working, as well as by the supportive work of my colleague Jiří Blažek.”

In Dr. Krakorova’s opinion, overview reports that show gaps in the research and provide context for one's own findings are suitable for finding space for research. In selecting the appropriate evidence for synthesis and analysis, she believes it is essential to draw data from relevant, up-to-date, high-quality and verified sources. It is advisable to obtain information from various materials: quantitative data (experimental measurements, results, statistics, etc.), qualitative evaluations (subjective view of investigators), overview reports (theoretical information) and case reports. A suitable source of information is meta-analyses that evaluate the results of several studies, and thanks to this, they have a larger sample of probands and a broader view of the issue. Every source needs to be subjected to critical thinking, because only then can we identify the strengths and weaknesses of the study. It is necessary to thoroughly evaluate the methodology, sample, conclusions, and possible biases. In the process of synthesis, it is advisable to focus primarily on systematic reviews and meta-analyses to ensure that no important studies are neglected by the scientists and that their resulting synthesis is clear and reproducible.

(by Brad Li, Masaki Lo)

Da Hyun Kang

Dr. Da Hyun Kang, MD, PhD, is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine at Chungnam National University Hospital in Daejeon, South Korea. Her clinical and research expertise focuses on the diagnosis and treatment of lung cancer, with a particular interest in early detection and improving patient prognosis. She is currently researching the various mechanisms involved in resistance to immunotherapy, which has gained significant attention in the treatment of lung cancer, and is actively working on identifying potential targets to overcome this resistance. Her research focuses on conducting translational research using minimally invasive samples, such as blood, bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF), and pleural fluid. By exploring these innovative approaches, she aims to enhance diagnostic accuracy and therapeutic strategies for lung cancer patients.

In Dr. Kang’s view, there are two key skill sets an academic writer should possess – creativity and attention to detail. First, to make the topic of a paper stand out as new and impactful, it must not have been previously reported in the same context by others. If the research is similar to existing work, it is crucial to present unique insights or discoveries that set it apart from earlier studies. Second, careful attention to the data is essential in identifying these fresh perspectives. This includes thoroughly examining the data and searching for enough relevant literature to support the findings. By doing so, the author ensures that the research is both innovative and well-founded.

Biases are inevitable in academic writing. To minimize one’s biases, Dr. Kang reckons that it is essential to use objective language and refrain from subjective expressions or emotional language that could influence the readers’ perception. Additionally, it is essential not to cite only research that supports one’s own viewpoint, but to also include studies that present different or opposing results.

“I am passionate about advancing knowledge in my field, particularly in understanding lung cancer and improving patient outcomes. Contributing original research and insights not only fuels my intellectual curiosity, but also has the potential to impact clinical practices and enhance patient care. Additionally, I find satisfaction in the process of transforming complex ideas into clear, impactful narratives that can inform others. This combination of personal passion and the desire to make a meaningful contribution keeps me motivated in my academic writing endeavors,” says Dr. Kang.

(by Brad Li, Masaki Lo)

Victor Moreno

Victor Moreno is the Director of Clinical Research at the START Madrid-FJD Early Phase Clinical Trials Unit at Fundación Jiménez Díaz University Hospital in Madrid, Spain. His primary focus is on the development of novel anticancer agents within the field of oncology. He has extensive experience participating in Phase I clinical trials, particularly with innovative immunotherapeutic agents, T cell engagers, adoptive cell therapies (including modified TCRs and CAR-T cells), novel antibody-drug conjugates, and targeted therapies.

In addition to clinical trials, he has been actively involved in several translational research projects within the preclinical program at START Madrid. Dr. Moreno’s research areas include the identification of biomarkers for chromatin remodelers, biomarkers for immunotherapy response, and the development of patient-derived xenografts for drug discovery. Furthermore, he is a collaborative professor at the Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, where he oversees and directs various PhD projects. In this role, he mentors and guides doctoral candidates, fostering the next generation of researchers in the fields of clinical research and oncology. Follow him on X, LinkedIn and ResearchGate.

TLCR: What are the most commonly encountered difficulties in academic writing?

Dr. Moreno: Scientific writing encompasses different types of articles. For original research papers, a primary difficulty is clearly articulating the research question and hypothesis. Researchers often struggle to define precise, testable hypotheses that align with their study objectives. To overcome this, it’s essential to refine the research question during the planning stages to ensure that it is specific and relevant. Additionally, to summarize years of research in a single paper can be cumbersome and investigators can miss the point of the article when trying to add too much irrelevant/exploratory objectives to the paper that dilute the impact of the primary finding.

In review articles, synthesizing existing literature comprehensively without introducing bias is a significant challenge. Balancing breadth and depth require meticulous literature searches and critical evaluation of sources. Structuring the review to highlight trends, gaps, and future directions can improve its effectiveness. Maintaining objectivity while providing insightful analysis is crucial, and adopting a systematic or thematic approach can help achieve this balance.

For commentaries, providing a meaningful and concise perspective on existing research is often difficult. Commentaries need to critically evaluate others' work while contributing original insights or highlighting important implications. Crafting a compelling narrative that is both informative and engaging, and balancing personal opinions with evidence-based arguments, are essential for credibility.

TLCR: Academic writing often involves evidence synthesis. Can you share tips on selecting the appropriate evidence for synthesis and analysis?

Dr. Moreno: In my opinion, the most important aspect of academic writing in science is to maintain the objectivity. To write in a scientific manner means to get rid of your beliefs and analyze the different results. Authors have to present evidence impartially, acknowledging different viewpoints and conflicting findings to provide a well-rounded analysis and always be open to findings that may contradict your hypotheses or expectations, ensuring a more objective synthesis. Another important aspect is to evaluate the credibility of each source by considering the authors’ expertise, publication reputation, and the robustness of the methodology used.

TLCR: Is it important for authors to disclose Conflict of Interest (COI)?

Dr. Moreno: Yes, I believe that it is important to disclose COI. Disclosing COI ensures that readers are aware of any potential biases that might affect the investigation. While a COI does not inherently alter the results of the research itself, it can influence various aspects of the study, such as decisions regarding study design, data collection methods, and analytical approaches. These influences can potentially lead to biased or skewed results, intentionally or unintentionally, which must be taken into account when evaluating the research findings.

(by Brad Li, Masaki Lo)

Hirokazu Taniguchi

Dr. Hirokazu Taniguchi has been a senior assistant professor at the Clinical Oncology Center in Nagasaki University Hospital since 2023, where he began to work as an assistant professor in the Department of Respiratory Medicine from 2022. He obtained MD from the Nagasaki University School of Medicine in 2009 and PhD in Biomedical Sciences at the Department of Respiratory Medicine at Nagasaki University Graduate School in 2018. After graduating from Nagasaki University in 2009, he gained clinical experience as a physician at Japanese Red Cross Nagasaki Genbaku Hospital, Nagasaki University Hospital, and Sasebo City General Hospital. From 2019-2022, he worked as a Research Fellow and Postdoctoral Fellow at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, where he gained experience in basic and translational research.

There are many patients around the world suffering from lung cancer. Dr. Taniguchi believes the role of a good academic paper is to present content that contributes to delivering better treatments to those patients. In his opinion, it is essential that researchers constantly reassess whether the content they are writing is scientifically accurate, novel, and beneficial to science or society.

“I believe that basic research, translational research, and clinical research are all essential. Since the integration of all these types of research leads to the development of crucial medical knowledge, I think TLCR is an excellent journal for its broad and comprehensive coverage,” says Dr. Taniguchi.

(by Brad Li, Masaki Lo)

Gaspard Naulleau

Dr. Gaspard Naulleau was born in France and studied Medicine in Paris at the Université Paris Cité. He became a junior doctor in Pneumology in 2022. He has always been interested in specializing in lung cancer. During his first year as a junior doctor, he published with the Centre Hospitalier Intercommunal de Créteil a case report on two hyperprogressive diseases following immune-checkpoint inhibitors in pleural mesothelioma. Along with this work, he is working with the Cochin Hospital Team on his thesis. He retrospectively study deceased patients with ALK-rearranged NSCLC focusing notably on therapeutic sequences. His next projects will include a Master’s thesis on Large Cell Neuroendocrine Carcinoma and a study on the art of ALK-rearranged NSCLC.

Dr. Naulleau thinks academic writing plays three main roles in science. First, it is the best tool to spread knowledge, especially with the use of websites such as PubMed. From anywhere in the world with an internet connection, researchers can get access to the best and most complete scientific news and articles. Second, it is a way to standardize the way researchers teach and spread knowledge. It is important to know where to look if they are looking for specific information. The presence of an abstract also allows them to browse more quickly through multiple sources and find the one most adapted to our situation. Third, academic writing forces the clinician to be as thorough as possible. It is a way to operate as precisely as possible and keep note of every detail, positive or negative.

In Dr. Naulleau’s view, different factors help authors ensure writing is up to date: First, regularly reading the publications in the field of expertise is essential. Having subscribed to the most important journals is the best way to do this. Second, regular bibliography sessions, included in the working hours, help researchers keep up with the first point. It is also a time-efficient way to stay up-to-date because they take advantage of the articles their colleagues read. Finally, he feels the peer-review system, when submitting an article to a journal, is efficient in pinpointing the eventual details that could be updated or improved.

“Academic writing takes a lot of time. When I look back at the history of the progress in lung cancer, I feel most improvements, apart from a few revolutionary treatments, seemed modest. But month of overall survival per month of overall survival gained, the progress in the last fifteen years has been tremendous. Knowing each small detail makes a difference in the long term and keeps me motivated. Furthermore, I feel academic writing is the best way to keep myself up to date, thus staying the best doctor I can be. I feel that science advances so rapidly that you can easily feel like you’re falling behind. I think academic writing prevents that, as it is a great and rewarding way to keep learning throughout your career,” says Dr. Naulleau.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Hiroyuki Inoue

Hiroyuki Inoue is a Clinical Professor in the Department of Respiratory Medicine at Fukuoka University, Japan. He obtained his M.D. from Kyushu University in 2001 and his Ph.D. in Cancer Immunology in 2008. His career spans various prestigious institutions, including the University of Chicago, Kyushu University, and Fukuoka University. His research focuses on lung cancer and the development of novel cancer immunotherapy with numerous publications in high-impact journals. In 2022, He co-founded JOCAVIO, a startup company to develop novel oncolytic virotherapies for advanced cancer patients. He has an impressive publication record, with over 60 peer-reviewed papers, and has been the principal investigator for multiple research grants. He is an active member of several international and Japanese medical societies, including the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer and the American Association for Cancer Research. His expertise in respiratory medicine and cancer research has established him as a leading figure in the field.

Dr. Inoue asserts academic writing serves as the primary channel for communicating scientific knowledge. It allows scientists to document their research, validate their findings, and share their discoveries with the wider scientific community. He adds scientific writing also acts as a form of quality control in the scientific process. The peer-review system ensures that research is scrutinized before publication, maintaining high standards in scientific literature.

Dr. Inoue regularly monitors new publications in his field using tools like PubMed updates, and Google Scholar alerts. He sets aside time each week to review recent literature and scan titles and abstracts to identify relevant papers. This habit helps him stay informed about the latest developments and incorporate them into his writing. He also attends conferences, participates in seminars, and engages in discussions with colleagues to follow cutting-edge research.

“I use time outside my scheduled writing sessions to think about my work. While performing other tasks, I mentally outline drafts, refine arguments, or develop hypotheses. This approach allows me to make progress on my writing even when I am not actively at my desk, maximizing my productivity throughout the day,” says Dr. Inoue.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Marcel Kemper

Dr. Marcel Kemper is a Clinician Scientist and Medical Oncologist at the Medical Department A for Hematology, Oncology, Hemostaseology, and Pneumology at the University Hospital of Muenster in Germany. In 2024, he completed his training in Hematology and Medical Oncology. As a Clinician Scientist, he has the privilege of conducting research in the laboratory of Prof. Dr. Annalen Bleckmann. His research focuses on tumor progression, cellular signaling pathways, innovative therapeutic interventions, and clinical studies in Oncology. He has a particular interest in lung cancer due to its high mortality rate and challenging prognosis. His goal is to deepen the understanding of this disease and contribute to the development of improved treatment strategies that enhance both the outcomes and quality of life for patients affected by lung cancer.

In Dr. Kemper’s view, academic writing is a vital resource for cancer researchers, enabling the effective dissemination of novel findings, theories, and insights into cancer biology and clinical applications. It promotes critical thinking by encouraging in-depth engagement with complex ideas. Serving as a universal framework for scholarly communication, academic writing fosters international collaboration and facilitates cross-disciplinary and cross-cultural exchanges. Moreover, it ensures research is trustworthy, verifiable, and replicable, driving advancements in cancer research. Ultimately, academic writing underpins the dissemination, evaluation, and application of knowledge, reinforcing its essential role in medical research, particularly in the field of oncology.

Dr. Kemper thinks it is essential to focus on analysis, evaluation, and synthesis to produce well-structured and well-reasoned writing. He explains, “Start by selecting a relevant topic that appeals to the readership and addresses unanswered questions. Evaluate the credibility of sources, identifying their strengths, weaknesses, and any gaps in the information. Compare and contrast different viewpoints to develop a well-rounded understanding of the topic. Present a clear and concise hypothesis, supported by strong arguments and thoroughly analyzed evidence. Use precise language that adheres to academic conventions, and acknowledge the limitations of analysis while suggesting areas for further exploration. Finally, revise the work thoroughly to ensure it demonstrates depth, coherence, and meaningful insights.”

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)