In 2025, 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 (2025)

Baptiste Abbar, Sorbonne University, France

Kamila Wojas-Krawczyk, Medical University in Lublin, Poland

Masaya Aoki, Kagoshima University, Japan

Hae Won Kim, Keimyung University Dongsan Hospital, Korea

T. Jeroen N. Hiltermann, University Medical Center Groningen, The Netherlands

Ernest Nadal, L’Hospitalet de Llobregat, Spain

Natsuo Tomita, Nagoya City University, Japan

Zhaohui Liao Arter, University of California, USA

Junichi Soh, Osaka Metropolitan University, Japan

Kyungjong Lee, Samsung Seoul Hospital, South Korea

Tatsuya Imabayashi, Japanese Red Cross Kyoto Daiichi Hospital, Japan

Ba X. Hoang, University of Southern California, USA

Alessio Cortellini, Campus Bio-Medico University, Italy

Mélanie Janson, The University of Caen Normandy, France

Maiken Parm Ulhøi, Aarhus University Hospital, Denmark

Yuki Katayama, Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine, Japan

Amira de Koning, Amsterdam UMC, The Netherlands

Francesca R. Ogliari, IRCCS San Raffaele Hospital, Italy

Yasuhiro Kato, Nippon Medical School, Japan

Soichiro Minami, Sendai Kousei Hospital, Japan

Taehun Kim, Keimyung University Dongsan Hospital, Korea

Hiroyasu Kaneda, Osaka Metropolitan University, Japan

Rajib Saha, The University of Nebraska–Lincoln, USA

Aleksandra Piórek, Maria Skłodowska-Curie National Research Institute of Oncology, Poland

Valeria I. Segatori, Quilmes National University, Argentina

Won Jin Jeon, Loma Linda University, USA

Illaa Smesseim, The Leiden University Medical Center, the Netherlands

Ilona Tietzova, Charles University, Czech

Joon Young Choi, The Catholic University of Korea, Korea

Kazuo Tsuchiya, Shizuoka Saiseikai General Hospital, Japan

Shunichi Kataoka, Shizuoka Cancer Center, Japan

Jin-Hee Park, Ajou University, Korea

Pedro Gonzalez Santa-Catalina, Salamanca University Hospital, Spain

Yuki Takigawa, NHO Okayama Medical Center, Japan

Outstanding Author

Baptiste Abbar

Baptiste Abbar, MD, PhD, is affiliated with Sorbonne University, the Department of Medical Oncology at Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), Pitié-Salpêtrière Hospital, and INSERM U1135, Centre d'Immunologie et des Maladies Infectieuses (CIMI-Paris), Paris, France. He completed his medical education at Sorbonne University from 2007-2020 and pursued his PhD within the ED394 program (Physiology, physiopathology et therapeutic) at the same institution. His medical practice focuses on lung cancers and cancers in immunocompromised patients. His research and teaching interests are primarily centered on thoracic oncology, immune-related adverse events, and the management of cancers in immunocompromised patients. He contributes significantly to advancing knowledge in these fields through his clinical and academic activities.

From Dr. Abbar’s perspective, academic writing is essential because it allows for the sharing of knowledge, supports critical thinking, and enriches discussions within specialized fields. It helps to formalize and organize ideas in a clear and structured manner, which is crucial for the advancement of knowledge.

In addition, Dr. Abbar thinks sharing research data is fundamental for ensuring the reproducibility of results and the standardization of methods across studies. It allows others to verify findings, encourages further exploration, and leads to more robust and reliable conclusions.

“I would like to remind all researchers that their work is valuable to the scientific community. While it is important to remain passionate and dedicated to research, it is equally important to preserve independence and objectivity in the pursuit of truth and progress,” says Dr. Abbar.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Kamila Wojas-Krawczyk

Prof. Kamila Wojas-Krawczyk is a laboratory diagnostician, and specialist in laboratory medical immunology and laboratory medical genetics. She is the winner of the prestigious UNESCO and L’oreal Scholarship for Women and Science and received many other awards, including the Poland Minister of Health Award for the series of publications on dendritic cells. In her scientific work, she mainly deals with disorders of the immune system in cancer diseases. In addition, she deals with molecular diagnostics of predictive factors in qualification for molecularly targeted therapies. She is author of many scientific articles and lectures on the complex mechanisms of the immune system. She widely promotes popular science knowledge about immunotherapy. For over 14 years, she has been the coordinator of the "Look Good Feel Better" campaign in Poland - care workshops for women undergoing anti-cancer treatment. She has provided scientific patronage over conferences and scientific meetings devoted to comprehensive care for patients undergoing oncological treatment.

In Dr. Wojas-Krawczyk’s daily scientific work, she focuses on research that can directly impact clinical applications, believing this should be the essence of scientific inquiry. Scientists conducting research in laboratories should work closely with clinicians. She is very interested in scientific papers that have a clear and well-formulated goal that is also embedded in the clinic. She believes a well-organized paper follows a logical flow, with a clear introduction, well-developed arguments, and a strong conclusion that addresses the research question. In addition to presenting data, the paper should offer a thoughtful analysis, drawing meaningful conclusions from the findings while acknowledging any limitations. It should also come as no surprise that a good paper should comply with ethical research standards, properly cite sources, and avoid plagiarism.

From Dr. Wojas-Krawczyk’s perspective, the basic characteristic of a good scientist is always to be impartial. One should be very curious about the world and at the same time have an objective view. In the context of a scientific publication, one should keep in mind several important elements. At the initial stage of planning experiments, attention should be paid to the appropriate selection of the test sample and appropriate controls for the conducted research. This allows for the proper interpretation of the obtained results. One should always present positive and negative results, as well as those that researchers did not expect; avoid emotionally charged or subjective wording that may skew interpretation during writing and reporting their results, and discuss and analyze results with the latest and most valuable publications.

“All scientists should remember that our research can help improve the future, give hope to many patients, and contribute to the expansion and exchange of experiences between researchers. That all could make the world a better place,” says Dr. Wojas-Krawczyk.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Masaya Aoki

Dr. Masaya Aoki works in the Department of General Thoracic Surgery, Graduate School of Medical and Dental Sciences, Kagoshima University, Kagoshima, Japan, and is a certificated surgeon in the Japanese Association for Chest Surgery, a console surgeon for Da Vinci, and a cockpit surgeon for hinotori^TM. In his daily practice, he not only performs surgery but also actively practices systemic therapy for thoracic disease and has reported the results in articles. He obtained his Ph.D. from the Graduate School of Kagoshima University in 2011 and was a research fellow at Toronto General Hospital, Thoracic Surgery in 2019 and 2020. He is actively conducting basic research and reporting results, focusing on perioperative treatment and the immune environment in the regional lymph nodes of lung cancer to develop treatments for thoracic diseases.

Dr. Aoki believes that a good academic paper clearly considers how the results obtained can contribute to the future development of science. It is also important to understand the limitations of the study conducted and clarify future issues. Authors should always be mindful of not overlooking new discoveries in daily clinical practice.

In constructing a paper, Dr. Aoki thinks that results must be interpreted objectively from various perspectives, and the process must be described in detail so that other scientists can reproduce it in the same manner in the future. It is important to fully understand the current scientific problem and discuss it clearly. However, scientists must understand that there may be interpretations other than their own. Additionally, he hopes authors can keep up with their great work in advancing science and always be grateful for the support from their colleagues and family.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Hae Won Kim

Dr. Hae Won Kim is an Associate Professor of Nuclear Medicine at Keimyung University Dongsan Hospital and Director of the Biomedical Research Center. He earned his M.D. in 2005 and Ph.D. in 2012 from Keimyung University School of Medicine. His research explores the metabolic foundations of neurodegenerative disorders, particularly how visceral adipose tissue metabolism affects cerebral glucose utilization in cognitive impairment, contributing to Alzheimer’s disease research. He has also developed predictive models for lung cancer risk using F-18 FDG PET imaging, improving early diagnosis. Recently, he has integrated deep learning with chest CT imaging to assess lung cancer risk, combining AI with advanced imaging techniques to enhance patient outcomes. His work bridges systemic metabolism, neurological function, and computational imaging, advancing diagnostic strategies in oncology and neurodegeneration.

Dr. Kim thinks academic writing is vital for advancing medical knowledge and technology. In healthcare, developing better diagnostic and therapeutic techniques improves patient outcomes. By documenting these advancements, researchers create a foundation for future studies. However, academic writing should not exist solely for research’s sake. It must drive innovation and provide practical benefits that enhance clinical practice. The ultimate goal is to extend and improve human life by ensuring each study contributes meaningfully to medical progress. Through rigorous academic writing, medical professionals refine methodologies, share insights, and facilitate research translation into real-world applications. This process enables continuous improvements in patient care and ensures that knowledge is effectively built upon for the future.

In Dr. Kim’s view, ensuring that one’s writing is critical involves moving beyond subjective assertions of importance and instead grounding one’s work in objective evidence and community validation. While every researcher might initially view their work as significant, true criticality is demonstrated when the research produces robust, reproducible results that resonate with the broader scientific community. Over time, if the work is widely cited and its findings contribute to further advancements, it attains an objective measure of importance. In this way, critical academic writing is not merely about presenting one's own ideas but about inviting scrutiny, encouraging replication, and fostering progress in the field.

“When I first began academic writing, I believed my research was solid and complete,” shares Dr. Kim, “However, as I conducted more studies, I realized my limitations. No matter how much effort I put in, there were always areas for improvement in methodology, analysis, or interpretation. A pivotal moment came when I received peer feedback. What I thought was a strong argument often had unnoticed gaps. My colleagues’ insights refined my work and enhanced its impact. This experience taught me that meaningful research requires collaboration. While research may start individually, high-quality work depends on expert input from diverse fields. The best discoveries come from collective efforts rather than individual brilliance. Ultimately, I learned that great research is not about proving myself right but contributing knowledge that others can build upon. True academic writing thrives not on personal perfection but on teamwork and shared intellectual growth.”

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

T. Jeroen N. Hiltermann

Jeroen Hiltermann received his MD at the University of Leiden in 1993 and was board-registered as a pulmonologist in 2003. In 1998, he received a Ph.D. with a thesis on air pollution and asthma. He joined the faculty of the Department of Pulmonary Medicine and Tuberculosis, University Medical Center Groningen in 2008, subspecializing in pulmonary oncology. In this field, he was appointed as associate professor in 2023. He has dedicated his clinical and research work to the whole area of lung cancer; and has been involved in and led many research projects, in close collaboration with other disciplines (e.g., Pathology, Medical Oncology). He has published over 110 peer-reviewed scientific papers and additionally several book chapters and reviews. Within his research themes, there is a strong focus on immunotherapy and translational medicine in lung cancer. He is the clinical lead for lung cancer within the European GUIDE.MRD consortium.

In Dr. Hiltermann’s view, a paper with original data supporting a solid hypothesis can be good academic writing. He believes that reading a lot of papers and talking about the subject at hand can help authors avoid biases in writing. He thinks science is fun but also hard work, and he hopes authors have an enthusiastic, exploring, and persevering mindset.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Ernest Nadal

Ernest Nadal, MD, PhD, is the Director of Research & Innovation at the Catalan Institute of Oncology (ICO) in L’Hospitalet de Llobregat in Barcelona, Spain. He is a Principal Investigator of the Preclinical and Experimental Research in Thoracic Tumors (PRETT) at the Bellvitge Biomedical Research Institute (IDIBELL) and an Associate Professor of Oncology at the University of Barcelona, Bellvitge campus. He is a physician-scientist and a medical oncologist by training. His research focuses on identifying novel therapeutic strategies for malignant pleural mesothelioma, genomic characterization of early-onset lung cancer, and studying special populations with lung cancer, such as those with brain metastases or cancer-related cachexia. He has a major interest in the design and development of clinical trials, but also in the utilization of preclinical models and evaluation of clinical samples in the lab to generate novel hypotheses to be evaluated in the clinic. 

According to Dr. Nadal, it is essential to address clinically meaningful research questions through innovative and translational approaches. As clinicians directly involved in the care of patients with thoracic malignancies, they are aware of the current gaps and unmet needs that limit current therapeutic strategies. Despite significant advances in lung cancer and pleural mesothelioma, many patients still face poor prognoses. By aligning clinical insight with cutting-edge research tools, they aim to generate impactful data that will help improve patient outcomes and shape the future of care.

In constructing a paper, Dr. Nadal recommends defining a clear research question and following a logical structure using precise language. It is also important to target an appropriate journal to effectively reach the intended audience. Moreover, through resilience, active engagement, and commitment, he thinks academic writers play a vital role in shaping the future of science. He believes these efforts are both valuable and inspiring.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Natsuo Tomita

Natsuo Tomita currently serves at the Department of Radiology, Nagoya City University Graduate School of Medical Sciences. His research areas include stereotactic radiation therapy, IMRT, non-small cell lung cancer, head and neck cancer, cervical cancer, radiation oncology, radiation therapy, and radiation biology. He is the principal investigator in a recent clinical trial, ISRCTN - ISRCTN15950448: Optimal irradiation intervals in stereotactic radiotherapy for patients with brain metastases. The new findings obtained from this study will provide valuable initial information on the optimal irradiation interval for stereotactic irradiation for all sites and tumors. Besides, he is also involved in many other clinical trials as a research collaborator. Find out more about his research here.

A good academic paper, according to Dr. Tomita, is easy to read, has a reproducible methodology, clear conclusions, and contains new insights. In constructing a paper, it is essential to keep the following points in mind when collecting and analyzing data, “What is the purpose of your research? What results from previous studies are related to your research?”

“I believe most Japanese doctors prioritize the impact factor when selecting open-access journals. Additionally, I value the efficiency of a journal's peer-review process. I am satisfied with both aspects of TLCR.,” says Dr. Tomita.

(by Brad Li, Masaki Lo)

Zhaohui Liao Arter

Dr. Zhaohui Liao Arter, MD, is a Clinical Assistant Professor specializing in Thoracic Oncology at the University of California, Irvine Medical Center. She has extensive experience in basic science, translational, and clinical research, with presentations at major conferences including ASCO, AACR, ASH, and ESMO. Her contributions have been recognized with numerous honors, including the ASCO Conquer Cancer Award, ESMO Merit Awards, and the ASH Achievement Award. With over 30 publications to her name, Dr. Arter is especially passionate about early-phase clinical trials, dedicated to translating scientific discoveries into first-in-human studies. Connect with her on X and LinkedIn.

TLCR: What are the key skill sets of an author?

Dr. Arter: I think being a good author really comes down to being able to think clearly and communicate those thoughts in a structured, compelling way. In academic writing especially, it's important to be analytical—you need to know how to evaluate data, interpret results, and tie everything back to the bigger picture. But beyond the technical side, you also need persistence. Writing is a process, and revisions are inevitable. Being open to feedback and knowing how to adapt your message for your audience are keys. Honestly, curiosity and a genuine interest in the topic also go a long way.

TLCR: How do you avoid biases in your writing?

Dr. Arter: That’s a great question. I try to be really mindful of my own assumptions going into any projects. It helps take a step back and ask myself: am I looking at all sides fairly? Am I giving enough space to opposing viewpoints? I also lean heavily on evidence—I try to ground everything in data rather than opinion. And I find that sharing my work early with colleagues or mentors helps catch any blind spots I might have missed. Having those outside perspectives is really helpful to keep things balanced.

TLCR: Academic writing takes a lot of time and effort. What motivates you to do it?

Dr. Arter: It does take a lot of time, and honestly, it can be exhausting at times—but what keeps me going is the impact it can have. Whether it's helping clinicians make better decisions, shedding light on an underappreciated issue, or opening up conversations in the field, I love that feeling of contributing something meaningful. On a personal level, writing also helps me process complex ideas—it sharpens my thinking. And when something you've worked hard on finally gets published or helps someone else think differently, it’s incredibly rewarding.

(by Brad Li, Masaki Lo)

Junichi Soh

Junichi Soh, MD, PhD, is Professor of Thoracic Surgery at Osaka Metropolitan University, Japan, and a member of the IASLC Screening & Early Detection Committee. After earning his Ph.D. from Okayama University, he completed two years of postdoctoral research at UT Southwestern Medical Center, focusing on molecular oncology, including oncogenic alterations of EGFR and KRAS. His clinical and research interests span from minimally invasive and robotic thoracic surgery, perioperative immunochemotherapy, to translational studies on driver oncogenes in lung cancer. He has published over 200 peer-reviewed papers and secured numerous competitive research grants. His recent work includes investigating perioperative minimal residual disease using circulating tumor DNA and resistance mechanisms in EGFR and KRAS-targeted therapies. Known for his leadership, logical thinking, and collaborative spirit, Dr. Soh is committed to advancing early detection and innovative treatment strategies for thoracic malignancies worldwide.

The most common difficulties in academic writing, from Dr. Soh’s perspective, involve the timely, sufficient and appropriate collection and management of references relevant to the chosen theme. Once the data collection and reference management are properly organized, it becomes much easier to draft the manuscript by integrating one’s own findings with the existing literature.

Dr. Soh thinks that medicine has advanced through the accumulation of research findings, especially those shared through academic writing. To him, academic writing plays a crucial role in establishing novel treatment strategies that can contribute to improving healthcare worldwide. While providing treatment is vital to save individual patients, academic writing is essential to help many more patients and represents an achievement that will endure over time.

“It is important for me to write summaries related to my chosen theme whenever I have time, and I try to take notes whenever ideas come to mind. During the daytime, I have a heavy workload with clinical duties, as well as responsibilities in education, research, and hospital administration. Therefore, I make use of my limited free time, especially on days off or when I can secure sufficient personal time, to work on writing papers based on these notes,” says Dr. Soh.

(by Brad Li, Masaki Lo)

Kyungjong Lee

Kyungjong Lee works at the Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Samsung Seoul Hospital in Seoul, South Korea, where he is affiliated with Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine. His research focuses on lung cancer diagnostics and the incidental detection of lung nodules on chest CT scans. He specifically concentrates on developing methods to distinguish between benign and malignant nodules to minimize risks during the diagnostic process.

TLCR: What do you regard as a good academic paper?

Dr. Lee: I believe a good academic paper opens up a space to broaden our interest in the clinical and research areas. As we encounter daily hurdles to tackle with patients in clinical fields, we need more information to answer the questions that have been raised in our minds. For that reason, academic papers should not only boost our understanding of the diseases but also answer the questions that we struggle with in everyday practice.

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

Dr. Lee: Going through a lot of clinical barriers in the field, we are capable of making good academic questions for the patients. However, it is imperative to have time and effort to file the blocks in each step, in which we have to spend time running in the race in the research. In the practice of clinicians treating patients, our resources are limited to making the research questions tangible as a published article. Academic writing is an interesting and self-disciplined field that requires me to put in more effort to be helpful to the readers.

TLCR: What is fascinating about academic writing?

Dr. Lee: Even though it is kind of hard work, I am fascinated by the results that have been published and read by other clinicians, whose questions need to be solved. We are living in a society heavily connected with invisible lines that affect each other at the same time. I would be delighted if someone could find answers to the problems that they face while reading my article or if my article would lead to new research projects at intutions.

(by Brad Li, Masaki Lo)

Tatsuya Imabayashi

Dr. Tatsuya Imabayashi is the Chief of the Department of Respiratory Medicine at Japanese Red Cross Kyoto Daiichi Hospital. He graduated from Hyogo College of Medicine in 2008 and earned his Ph.D. in Respiratory Medicine from Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine in 2020. From 2020 to 2023, he worked in the Department of Endoscopy at the National Cancer Center Hospital (Tokyo, Japan), specializing in respiratory endoscopy. Since 2023, he has been leading the bronchoscopy team at his current hospital. His research interests include diagnostic bronchoscopy using R-EBUS and CP-EBUS, rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE), and cryobiopsy. Recently, he has been focusing on CT-guided bronchoscopy using Angio-CT, cone-beam CT, and O-arm CT. His ultimate goal is to develop minimally invasive therapeutic strategies for peripheral lung cancer using advanced bronchoscopy techniques.

In Dr. Imabayashi’s view, academic writing serves as a vital tool to transform daily clinical experiences into shared medical knowledge. In fields like bronchoscopy, many insights—such as how to manage minor complications, technical adjustments, or strategies for unexpected failures—can be gained only through hands-on experience. Unless these are documented, they remain confined to individual institutions and cannot be validated or built upon. Publishing such findings promotes standardization and ultimately improves the quality of care. Writing also enables clinicians to reflect on their own practice, often uncovering new questions and perspectives. For bronchoscopists, writing academically is not merely a scholarly activity; it is a vital way to investigate and enhance the best practices in bronchoscopy and patient care.

Dr. Imabayashi believes that the most important quality of an academic writer is the ability to notice subtle inconsistencies or questions that arise during clinical practice. Research often begins with a simple “Why?”—for example, “Why did this biopsy fail?” or “Why did this complication occur?”. To explore such questions, it is essential to maintain consistency in bronchoscopic procedures and build a high-quality clinical database through daily practice. Another critical quality is persistence—the ability to complete a manuscript even when facing setbacks. Writing a paper is rarely a smooth process; it involves repeated challenges and frustrations. He thinks that overcoming these obstacles is what enables them to grow as researchers.

“Like many clinicians, I often find it difficult to secure large blocks of time for writing. That is why I place great value on writing papers with junior colleagues. Working as a team reduces the overall workload and creates a shared sense of responsibility, which helps maintain motivation and consistency. It also provides an excellent opportunity for teaching—guiding younger doctors through the process of academic writing using real cases, which helps cultivate the next generation of clinician-researchers. Collaborative writing allows us to make steady progress even with limited time. For me, this team-based approach is one of the most practical and sustainable ways to continue academic writing while managing a busy clinical schedule,” says Dr. Imabayashi.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Ba X. Hoang

Ba Xuan Hoang, MD, PhD, is an Assistant Professor at the Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California (USC). His interdisciplinary research encompasses clinical pharmacology, immunology, tissue engineering, oncology, and pain management. His work particularly focuses on advancing cancer treatment and drug development, with a strong emphasis on the use of natural compounds, micronutrients, and drug repurposing strategies. Beyond oncology, he has actively contributed to developing innovative, safe, and cost-effective therapeutic approaches for various immunopathologic and chronic degenerative diseases. These include immune thrombocytopenia, chronic kidney disease and kidney failure, asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and pulmonary fibrosis. His current research is centered on exploring metabolic therapies for cancer, chronic pain, cachexia, and end-stage renal disease, aiming to improve patient outcomes through novel, evidence-based interventions.

From Dr. Hoang’s perspective, academic writing is essential because it ensures that evidence is communicated transparently and ethically in medicine and the health sciences, where decisions can directly impact human lives. Peer-reviewed literature, clinical guidelines, and innovative therapeutic development all rely on a shared standard of writing that prioritizes objectivity, critical thinking, and evidence-based reasoning. Ultimately, academic writing is not just about publishing; it is about advancing collective understanding and improving patient care and public health outcomes.

Dr. Hoang believes that data sharing is crucial for researchers. In the medical and health sciences, where research directly impacts patient care and public health, the sharing of data also fosters collaboration and informed decision-making. However, it is essential that data sharing is conducted ethically, with appropriate protection for patient privacy and consent.

“To my fellow academic writers and researchers: your dedication to scientific discovery is more critical than ever. Your commitment to evidence, rigor, and inquiry drives real progress in a world facing complex health and environmental challenges. While science may not always be fast or widely recognized, every careful publication, observation, and experiment adds to the foundation of future breakthroughs. Remember, many transformative therapies and preventive measures have stemmed from chance observations, simple experiments, and repurposing existing drugs or natural substances,” says Dr. Hoang.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Alessio Cortellini

Dr. Alessio Cortellini, MD, PhD, is an Assistant Professor of Medicine at Campus Bio-Medico University and Consultant Oncologist at Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico in Rome, Italy. He also holds an Honorary Clinical Lectureship at Imperial College London. His clinical and research expertise focuses on immunotherapy for cancer, with a special interest in lung cancer, host-related factors, and immune-related toxicities. He has coordinated multiple multicenter studies and contributed extensively to the development of real-world evidence in oncology. He has authored over 240 peer-reviewed publications, including in leading journals such as Journal of Clinical Oncology, Lancet Oncology, and JAMA Oncology. His recent projects explore predictive biomarkers for immunotherapy, the integration of artificial intelligence and digital pathology in thoracic oncology, and the long-term outcomes of patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors. He is the recipient of several international awards, including the 2024 IASLC Young Investigator Grant.

Dr. Cortellini indicates that one of the main challenges in writing is achieving clarity while preserving scientific rigor. Writing often requires balancing technical precision with accessibility, especially when addressing multidisciplinary audiences. Another difficulty is finding originality in framing the research question and contextualizing results within an expanding literature. Moreover, authors often struggle with synthesizing complex data into a coherent narrative, ensuring consistency between methods, results, and conclusions. Finally, time pressure and the iterative process of revisions can make writing particularly demanding.

In Dr. Cortellini’s view, evidence synthesis should be guided by methodological rigor and clinical relevance. Authors must ensure inclusion of high-quality studies, prioritizing prospective trials, meta-analyses, and large real-world datasets when available. Selection should be transparent, reproducible, and avoid bias by defining criteria in advance. Equally important is the ability to critically appraise evidence, identifying limitations and heterogeneity, rather than simply summarizing findings. Authors should also place evidence in context, integrating both landmark studies and recent advances, while avoiding redundancy. Ultimately, the synthesis should support a clear narrative that informs clinical decision-making and highlights gaps for future research.

“TLCR offers an excellent platform for high-impact dissemination of thoracic oncology studies. The journal’s scope bridges translational science and clinical practice, aligning perfectly with my research in immunotherapy, biomarkers, and real-world evidence,” says Dr. Cortellini.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Mélanie Janson

Dr. Mélanie Janson is currently a sixth-semester medical oncology resident at the University of Caen Normandy in France. Her primary interests are thoracic oncology, with a particular focus on immunotherapy and targeted therapies. Throughout her training, she has been engaged in exploring innovative treatment approaches that aim to improve patient outcomes and advance the field of precision medicine. She is committed to contributing to ongoing research efforts and integrating emerging scientific knowledge into clinical practice.

In Dr. Janson’s opinion, academic writing is essential because it allows, as much as possible, for objective results regarding the effectiveness of treatments. It also provides a way to share rare clinical experiences through case reports, which can help guide management in atypical situations that fall outside established guidelines.

Dr. Janson believes that continuing to develop academic research is crucial. This research enables scientists to make informed therapeutic choices by identifying the patient groups most likely to benefit from certain treatments or the optimal sequence of those treatments. This also includes the development of predictive tools for treatment response or non-response, to move toward increasingly personalized medicine.

In addition, Dr. Janson considers it essential to share research data, whether the results are positive or negative, as this encourages reflection on unexplored avenues and helps refine those that have shown promising outcomes.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Maiken Parm Ulhøi

Maiken Parm Ulhøi is a medical doctor and PhD student at Aarhus University and Aarhus University Hospital in Denmark. She is one year away from completing her clinical oncology specialization. She is completing a Danish multi-center PhD project focused on the clinical use of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) in patients with incurable ALK-positive non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), with a special focus on ctDNA monitoring and blood-based biomarkers. She studies biomarkers associated with treatment outcomes and investigates the mechanisms of molecular resistance. In addition to her work on ALK-positive NSCLC, she also contributes to research on other oncogenic drivers and biomarkers in lung cancer. Through her research, she aims to provide insights that can improve precision medicine strategies and optimize treatment monitoring for patients with advanced lung cancer.

TLCR: What role does academic writing play in science?

Dr. Ulhøi: Academic writing is fundamental in scientific endeavors as it provides a structured methodology for presenting information, ideas, and data through logical reasoning. This framework enables researchers to explore specific topics, identify gaps in existing knowledge or treatment approaches, and generate new insights that contribute to the advancement of future therapies and outcomes. Academic writing also promotes transparency, rigor, and accessibility within the scientific community. Notably, research grounded in real-world data, including my own investigations, enhances understanding of the biological aspects of treatment in routine patients, thereby bridging the divide between clinical trials and everyday clinical practice. Consequently, academic writing transforms individual observations into collective scientific progress.

TLCR: The burden of being a /doctor is heavy. How do you allocate time to write papers?

Dr. Ulhøi: During my PhD, which I conducted alongside my clinical work, I closely monitored the patients in my project while gaining a deep understanding of the complexity of clinical data and the limitations of clinical endpoints. This experience provided a solid foundation for conducting clinical research alongside patient care. Having established a complete cohort with ongoing follow-up, continuing this research beyond my PhD seems like a natural progression. Although I dedicate personal time to academic writing and analysis, I view this as a vital extension of my clinical duties at a high-quality university hospital—aimed at generating evidence-based knowledge relevant to patient outcomes. To pursue this work with the necessary rigor, I actively seek funding opportunities to secure dedicated research time. I believe ongoing research and education are essential for clinical oncologists to provide the best patient care.

TLCR: Why is it important for a researcher to apply for institutional review board (IRB) approval?

Dr. Ulhøi: Approval from an IRB is crucial for any research involving patients, as it protects their rights, safety, and confidentiality. The IRB ensures risks are minimized, justified, and that informed consent is transparent and comprehensive. This oversight protects patients while upholding ethical, legal, and scientific standards. Failure to obtain IRB approval can lead to serious consequences. It may expose patients to potential harm, render the study unethical or illegal, and prevent the publication, presentation, or clinical application of the results. Both researchers and institutions may also face disciplinary actions. Therefore, IRB approval should not be seen as a mere formality but rather as a fundamental aspect of ethical research. It ensures studies are credible, responsible, and of real value to the field, while maintaining the trust and protection of the patients who make research possible.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Yuki Katayama

Dr. Yuki Katayama is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Pulmonary Medicine at the Graduate School of Medical Science, Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine, Japan. He received his medical degree in 2015 and his doctoral degree in 2023, both from Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine. His research interest focuses on the mechanisms of drug tolerance and adaptive resistance to molecular targeted therapy in lung cancer harboring driver oncogenes. In addition to his academic activities, he practices as a respiratory physician, aiming to translate laboratory findings into improved treatment strategies and precision medicine for patients with non-small cell lung cancer.

In Dr. Katayama’s view, common difficulties in writing include organizing complex data into a clear narrative, maintaining logical flow, and achieving clarity for international readers. For non-native English speakers, subtle linguistic nuances can also be challenging.

In constructing a paper, Dr. Katayama secures writing time by treating it as a core part of research. He divides the manuscript into smaller sections and sets aside focused periods, often in early mornings or on less busy clinical days.

In addition, Dr. Katayama believes that guidelines such as CONSORT or STROBE promote transparency, reproducibility, and completeness. They enhance credibility, facilitate peer review, and ultimately improve the reliability of scientific communication.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Amira de Koning

Amira de Koning is a fourth-year medical student and, since September 2024, she has been working as a Research Assistant in Lung Cancer at Amsterdam UMC. In this role, she contributes to several projects on both early-stage and metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). For her master’s thesis, Amira presented the results of the preliminary analysis of the DIRECT Study, assessing the safety and efficacy of neoadjuvant tremelimumab plus durvalumab or durvalumab alone with radiotherapy in early-stage NSCLC. In August 2024, she published her first editorial, marking an important milestone that deepened her passion for academic writing. She strongly believes in her motto, “turn your passion into your profession”, which motivates her to work hard and embrace every learning opportunity. She is eager to further explore the dynamic field of lung cancer research and its rapidly evolving innovations. Connect with her on LinkedIn.

Amira thinks a good academic paper clearly defines its scope, approaches the topic with an open mind, and avoids relying on assumptions. It reflects genuine curiosity, enthusiasm, and dedication to the field. Strong research involves actively discussing ideas with colleagues, being receptive to criticism, engaging in constructive debate, and incorporating feedback. Above all, a sound methodology forms the backbone of a high-quality paper.

To gain new insights into writing, Amira explores a variety of recent scientific literature and maintains close connections with colleagues and mentors. Her genuine interest in her field drives her to stay closely updated on new developments. By remaining critical and reflective, she aims to ensure that her writing not only stays current but also provides fresh insights to contribute meaningfully to the field. Moreover, publishing her first scientific editorial was a significant milestone in her academic development. It marked the start of her contributions to the scientific community and strengthened her confidence that curiosity and dedication can lead to meaningful publications.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Francesca R. Ogliari

Dr. Francesca Rita Ogliari has been a medical oncologist at IRCCS San Raffaele Hospital since 2020. Her clinical focus is thoracic malignancies, particularly lung cancer. She is strongly interested in clinical research and is currently completing the final year of her PhD in Molecular Medicine. Her doctoral project investigates the integration of machine learning models into clinical practice, with the specific aim of predicting outcomes in patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer. This dual role as clinician and researcher allows her to bridge patient care and innovation, fostering a translational approach.

In Dr. Ogliari’s view, academic writing is the primary tool through which new ideas are disseminated among peers, and it allows everyone to agree or disagree with the author. It benefits the research community because sharing evidence, opinions, and studies stimulates debate, but it also significantly benefits the author, who must pause, reflect, and define what is already known and what is not. This process fosters scientific advancement by serving as the primary tool researchers use to articulate their discoveries and the methodologies involved, thereby inspiring future studies and prompting questions that can lead to new insights.

Dr. Ogliari believes that producing relevant and original academic writing requires extensive study and strong mentorship. Innovative ideas cannot emerge without a deep understanding of the field and the opportunity to engage with experienced colleagues. Good mentors provide context, guide interpretation, and help shape theories in a way that is rigorous yet accessible. Writing is both a communication tool and a structured exercise for developing new perspectives, contributing to ongoing scientific dialogue.

Dr. Ogliari sees writing as one of the most effective methods for studying, practicing critical thinking, and analyzing topics in a systematic and rigorous way. Comparing similarities and differences across clinical studies sharpens understanding, highlights true knowledge gaps, and feeds a researcher’s mindset. This process fosters curiosity, encourages constructive reflection, and prepares one to approach the future with both scientific rigor and innovative thinking. She thinks that staying motivated is essential for becoming a good clinician and researcher through writing.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Yasuhiro Kato

Yasuhiro Kato is an Associate Professor of the Graduate School of Medicine at Nippon Medical School, Tokyo, Japan. He is an experienced pulmonologist with an MD and a PhD, specializing in lung cancer and thoracic oncology. He has extensive experience in translational research and clinical trials, including clinical cohort research and basic research on targeted therapies and immunotherapy for lung cancer. He is dedicated to enhancing patient outcomes by utilizing precision medicine and addressing drug resistance. He has particularly advanced research on the clinical and pathological factors of mutation-positive lung cancer and the mechanisms of resistance to molecularly targeted therapies. In his most recent study, he reported the involvement of lipid metabolism as a mechanism of resistance to NTRK-TKI, and he is also pursuing research on the connection between lung cancer and metabolism.

Dr. Kato believes that the quality of an academic paper depends on whether the author's message effectively reaches the reader. Even when dealing with complex designs or analyses, he always keeps in mind whether the reader can derive a simple, clear message. He adds that bias often stems from ignorance. Researchers should study diligently to gain knowledge.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Soichiro Minami

Dr. Soichiro Minami is a respiratory physician at Sendai Kousei Hospital, specializing in thoracic oncology. His research focuses on real-world outcomes of immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy, particularly nivolumab plus ipilimumab (NIVO + IPI) in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). He has conducted several retrospective and biomarker-based studies investigating the association between immune-related adverse events (irAEs) and therapeutic efficacy. He is also deeply interested in ICI rechallenge strategies and late-onset immune-related adverse events (irAEs), and he aims to pursue further clinical research in these areas. He actively contributes to the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer (IASLC) and presented his work at the World Conference on Lung Cancer (WCLC).

TLCR: Why do we need academic writing?

Dr. Minami: Although I currently work as a physician in Japan, I aspire to contribute on a global stage. To achieve this, I believe that academic writing—especially publishing original research—is one of the most effective ways to communicate who I am and what I value as a clinician and researcher. In the medical field, a peer-reviewed paper functions as a universal language and common currency that transcends borders. Through publications, one’s ideas, data, and philosophy of medicine can be shared, evaluated, and respected internationally. Therefore, I consider writing papers not only as a professional responsibility but also as an essential tool to connect my clinical practice in Japan with the global medical community.

TLCR: What are the qualities an author should possess?

Dr. Minami: I believe that an author should have not only curiosity and integrity, but also humility. Passion is essential in research, yet it must be balanced with restraint—avoiding overstatement or exaggeration. An author should draw conclusions that are proportionate to the study’s scale and design, maintaining a sense of realism and honesty. This modest approach reflects respect for previous researchers and for colleagues working in the same field. In academic writing, humility does not weaken one’s message; rather, it strengthens credibility and fosters scientific dialogue. I consider this attitude—a balance of enthusiasm, rigor, and respect—to be a core concept that defines a mature and trustworthy researcher.

TLCR: Given the heavy burden of being a doctor, how do you find the time to write research papers?

Dr. Minami: For me, research and academic writing form the vertical axis—the core that defines who I am as a physician. Conducting research helps me recognize what I should have asked or examined more carefully in daily practice, while clinical experience provides new insights and questions that enrich my research. Clinical work and clinical research are inseparable; each reinforces and refines the other. Although research and writing inevitably require extra time, I feel they actually enhance the quality and fulfillment of my clinical work. When I find joy and intellectual stimulation in this process, the sense of burden disappears. Rather than being an obligation, research becomes a source of professional satisfaction and personal growth, allowing me to see my daily practice within a broader scientific and human context.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Taehun Kim

Dr. Taehun Kim works in the Division of Pulmonary Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine at Keimyung University Dongsan Hospital in Daegu, South Korea. Clinically, his practice includes providing optimal care for patients with lung cancer and interstitial lung disease. His research focuses on developing safe and accurate bronchoscopic lung biopsy techniques for both malignant and benign pulmonary lesions, including granulomatous diseases and interstitial lung diseases. He is particularly interested in improving diagnostic yield and procedural safety across various bronchoscopic platforms. His recent projects have centered on evaluating challenging-to-diagnose pulmonary nodules and conducting head-to-head comparisons between different biopsy modalities.

Dr. Kim believes that a good academic paper clearly identifies an important clinical or scientific question and answers it through rigorous methodology and transparent analysis. It should contribute new knowledge or insight, rather than merely confirming what is already known. Equally important, a strong paper inspires new ideas and directions for fellow researchers, encouraging further progress in the field. In his opinion, the best papers integrate scientific rigor with clarity, honesty, and the ability to inspire meaningful discussion and innovation.

According to Dr. Kim, avoiding bias begins with recognizing one’s own assumptions. Authors should let the data speak for themselves rather than trying to make the results fit a preferred conclusion. Engaging in active discussions with colleagues and welcoming diverse viewpoints are essential to maintaining objectivity. It is also important to stay open to new and evolving statistical methods that can better address confounding factors and improve analytical accuracy. Such collaboration and methodological openness help ensure that our conclusions remain both balanced and scientifically sound.

“Scientific writing is often a long and challenging journey, but every well-conducted study—no matter how small—adds value to our collective understanding. I encourage fellow researchers to keep asking meaningful questions and to write with integrity and curiosity. It is also important to constantly reflect on our current practices—asking whether they represent the best we can do and where improvements might be made. Progress comes from those who are not afraid to question, to innovate, and to challenge the limits of existing knowledge. Our shared efforts ultimately move medicine forward and improve patients’ lives, which is the most rewarding outcome of all,” says Dr. Kim.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Hiroyasu Kaneda

Dr. Hiroyasu Kaneda is an Associate Professor in the Department of Clinical Oncology, Osaka Metropolitan University Graduate School of Medicine. He earned his M.D. in 2000 and Ph.D. in 2010. During his doctoral research, he realized that clinical specimens play a pivotal role in translational research, a lesson that continues to shape his current clinical studies. His clinical expertise lies in lung cancer pharmacotherapy, spanning perioperative therapy, molecular targeted therapy, and emerging immunotherapy. He is actively leading investigator-initiated trials (IITs) to establish novel treatment strategies addressing unmet medical needs in lung cancer.

In Dr. Kaneda’s opinion, a good academic paper should have a global and domestic impact at the time of publication, demonstrate originality, and preserve scientific value. To achieve this, the study rationale and clinical question must be clearly defined. In essence, the quality of a paper is often determined at the stage of study conception.

To minimize biases, Dr. Kaneda believes that one should maintain an objective and evidence-based approach, avoiding overinterpretation or selective citation. It is crucial to acknowledge study limitations and potential conflicts of interest. Peer feedback and collaboration across disciplines can also help ensure balanced and fair interpretation of data, leading to greater scientific integrity.

“For whom is our research conducted? For whom is our treatment delivered? Keeping these questions in mind while continuously exploring new ideas is essential for the advancement of medicine. Scientific writing is a demanding journey, but every well-constructed study contributes to collective knowledge and patient benefit. I encourage all academic writers to stay motivated, maintain curiosity, and continue pursuing truth through rigorous research. Even small steps forward in science have the potential to make a lasting difference in people’s lives,” says Dr. Kaneda.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Rajib Saha

Dr. Rajib Saha is the Graduate Chair and Richard L. and Carol S. McNeel Associate Professor of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering at the University of Nebraska–Lincoln. His lab integrates systems biology, synthetic biology, and computational modelling to understand and reprogram microbial metabolism. Trained as a chemical engineer, his research spans from pathogens and plant systems to polyextremotolerant fungi—united by a focus on deciphering complex biological networks and turning them into designable systems. Some of his recent projects are supported by the Air Force Office of Scientific Research (AFOSR), the National Science Foundation (NSF), and the National Institutes of Health (NIH). These efforts range from decoding melanin biosynthesis in black fungi to engineering microbes for lignin valorisation and drought-resilient agriculture, to predictive modelling of immune metabolism. His work bridges computation and experiment to advance sustainable biomanufacturing and deepen our understanding of life under stress.

In Dr. Saha’s view, a good academic paper is clear in purpose, transparent in method, and honest about uncertainty. It poses a specific question based on previous research, explains its significance, and highlights what is novel. Results are presented with sufficient methodological detail for others to reproduce and to build upon—data, code, model parameters, and assumptions are made findable and well-documented. Figures are designed to teach (not merely impress): they link a succinct narrative to quantitative evidence, show appropriate baselines and controls, and make effect sizes and limitations visible. A strong paper anticipates alternative explanations, tests them when possible, and clearly states the limits of inference. Finally, it closes the loop by converting findings into actionable next steps—testable predictions, hypotheses for validation, or practical guidelines for the community.

According to Dr. Saha, avoiding bias in academic writing begins with recognizing where it can enter—through data interpretation, methodological choices, or even tone. He explains that he uses several layers of safeguards to minimize it. First, clearly separate different levels of evidence, distinguishing direct measurements, model outputs, and interpretation, and labelling any speculation as such. Wherever possible, predefine analyses and report all relevant results, including negative findings and sensitivity checks, to prevent selective reporting. Methodologically, rely on proper baselines, ablations, and blinded evaluations, quantifying uncertainty with appropriate statistics and guarding against overfitting through cross-validation on independent data. He also strives for fairness in literature review—citing work across disciplines, geographies, and career stages to ensure balanced representation. Invite a diverse group of collaborators to review the manuscript's framing and language, conduct “red-team” evaluations for alternative explanations, and ensure full transparency by sharing data, code, and comprehensive documentation along with any limitations.

“Science moves through many small, careful steps that only look like leaps in hindsight. If you are writing to advance the field, you are already contributing clarity and rigor. Choose questions that genuinely spark your curiosity, collaborate generously across disciplines, and let methods serve the biology (or the problem), not the other way around. Draft early, revise often, and separate the roles of author and editor: first write for ideas, then cut for clarity. Make your work usefully reproducible - future you (and others) will thank you. Accept reviews as free expert consultations, respond with kindness, and carry forward what improves the science. Most importantly, keep going. The community needs your voice, your questions, and your persistence,” says Dr. Saha.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Aleksandra Piórek

Dr. Aleksandra Piórek is an Assistant Professor at the Department of Lung and Thoracic Tumors, Maria Skłodowska-Curie National Research Institute of Oncology in Warsaw, Poland. She specializes in the treatment of patients with lung and thoracic cancers. Her scientific interests focus on rare respiratory tract malignancies, including primary tracheal tumors. She is the author of numerous publications in international journals and the recipient of the 2021 Polish Society of Clinical Oncology Award for the best PhD thesis. She leads a series of studies on primary tracheal tumors that have comprehensively characterized this rare disease and resulted in a proposed TNM classification and therapeutic recommendations. Currently, she is involved in research on even rarer neuroendocrine thymic tumors. Her work has contributed to a better understanding of prognostic factors and treatment outcomes in rare cancers, which often remain outside the mainstream of oncological research.

Dr. Piórek thinks that academic writing organizes knowledge and fosters a shared language within the scientific community. Through publications, researchers can exchange experiences and research findings that become the foundation for further discoveries. In oncology, therapeutic decisions often depend on literature data, and a well-prepared article can significantly impact patient outcomes.

From Dr. Piórek’s perspective, critical writing requires openness, humility, and a willingness to question established assumptions. Every result should be viewed as part of a broader picture rather than an ultimate truth. She adds that the key is to combine rigorous statistical analysis with clinical reflection—asking whether the data can genuinely influence medical practice. Collaboration with other specialists is also essential, as diverse perspectives help avoid oversimplifications and lead to more reliable conclusions. She believes that critical thinking grows from humility toward data and a clear understanding of the limitations of one’s own research.

“What I remember most vividly is preparing a publication on primary tracheal tumors—an exceptionally rare disease. Analyzing cases collected over many years was like assembling the missing pieces of a puzzle. Over time, I realized that even single, well-documented observations can hold great scientific value. This experience taught me that research on rare cancers requires patience, but it also brings exceptional satisfaction when one manages to contribute something new to clinical knowledge,” says Dr. Piórek.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Valeria I. Segatori

Dr. Valeria I. Segatori earned a Bachelor's degree in Biotechnology and a PhD in Science and Technology from the National University of Quilmes (UNQ), where she has 16 years of teaching experience. She serves as an Associate Professor for undergraduate courses and teaches in graduate programs and extension workshops. Her postdoctoral work focused on advancing UNQ’s technology and knowledge transfer to industry, healthcare, and community sectors, gaining expertise in technology transfer through third-party services and industry partnerships. Specializing in translational research in glycobiology and preclinical immuno-oncology at UNQ’s Molecular and Translational Oncology Center, she contributed to the development of Vaxira®, an immunotherapy targeting tumor glycans approved for non-small cell lung cancer. As the principal investigator, she has led funded projects, resulting in a patent application, multiple publications in international journals, book chapters, and over 60 presentations at national and international conferences. She also has extensive experience training undergraduate and graduate students.

TLCR: What are the essential elements of a good academic paper?

Dr. Segatori: I do not believe there is a single formula for writing a good academic paper, as there are many effective approaches. To me, one of the most important aspects is that the paper tells an interesting and clear story. This involves beginning with a clearly defined research problem in the introduction, followed by an organized presentation of the results, and an honest, objective discussion that interprets the findings while acknowledging any limitations of the study. I also find it crucial to include the translational relevance of the work, even for early-stage or basic research, to demonstrate how the study might have an impact beyond the immediate findings.

TLCR: What authors have to bear in mind during the preparation of a paper?

Dr. Segatori: From my experience, authors should take great care in choosing the journal that best fits their manuscript, so their findings reach the right audience. Taking the time to analyze the journal’s scope often leads to a review process that truly enriches the paper. I have found that the final versions of my manuscripts have always improved after thorough evaluations and valuable feedback from committed reviewers. Sometimes it can be really challenging. We must face disappointing results and even rejections, so being resilient is essential. As authors, it is essential to remain receptive to constructive criticism, recognizing that science is developed collectively through ongoing dialogue and shared insights.

TLCR: Would you like to say a few words to encourage other academic writers who have been devoting themselves to advancing scientific progress?

Dr. Segatori: More than just encouraging authors, I want to sincerely thank them for taking the time to share their results with the scientific community. I am convinced that publishing is not merely a requirement we fulfill to advance our academic careers. While that is certainly important, I believe many of us are genuinely enthusiastic about communicating our findings, hoping others will build upon our work. In a way, publishing is also a form of validation for our efforts. The writing process can be demanding, and it takes time to prepare a manuscript. However, resilience allows us to progress despite setbacks, transforming challenges into opportunities for learning and growth.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Won Jin Jeon

Dr. Won Jin (Joseph) Jeon, MD, is a hematology oncology fellow at Loma Linda University in Southern California. His clinical and research interests include hematology and oncology, with a primary research focus on thoracic oncology. His research emphasises biomarker discovery—particularly prognostic, predictive, and targetable biomarkers—and outcomes research, to improve cancer care and address areas of clinical uncertainty.

Dr. Jeon believes that academic writing is essential to the advancement of science. In clinical practice, particularly as a physician, engaging with current and up-to-date literature is a daily necessity. Academic writing enables the dissemination of knowledge, the sharing of collective experience, and the critical evaluation of evidence, all of which ultimately contribute to improved patient care and outcomes.

Dr. Jeon’s motivation to write stems from the enjoyment of academic writing and a desire to contribute meaningfully to the existing literature. This provides the “why” that fuels his commitment to writing after completing clinical responsibilities. He also values the writing process itself. In addition, collaboration with co-authors and guidance from mentors are essential to producing thorough, well-developed manuscripts. Working in an academic setting, mentoring medical students and residents, and collaborating with interdisciplinary teams enhance the writing experience and naturally foster mentorship opportunities, which he thoroughly enjoys. This collaborative framework supports the “how” of personally integrating writing into a demanding clinical schedule.

From Dr. Jeon’s perspective, for many research projects, obtaining an institutional review board (IRB) approval is a critical necessity and requirement. The IRB serves as a safeguard to ensure that research is conducted ethically, responsibly, and in accordance with established guidelines and to protect research participants while guiding investigators toward sound study design. Omitting this step can risk patient safety and undermine the credibility of the study.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Illaa Smesseim

Dr. Illaa Smesseim has been a pulmonologist at Leiden University Medical Center (LUMC) since 2025, specialising in thoracic oncology and pulmonary interventions. After completing her pulmonology training at Amsterdam UMC, she did a pulmonary interventions internship at University College London Hospitals and worked for three years as a pulmonologist at the Antoni van Leeuwenhoek hospital. During this period, she combined her clinical work with a PhD trajectory (Artificial Intelligence in Asbestos-Related Diseases) and training to become a clinical epidemiologist. After that, she did a research fellowship at New York University Hospital. She then started in her current position at the LUMC.

TLCR: Why do we need academic writing?

Dr. Smesseim: In medicine, many things are still not well studied. Some of the things we do are based on expert opinion and not on strong data. Weak evidence should encourage us to conduct our own research and share it. These academic papers can help improve our medical practice.

TLCR: What are the qualities an author should possess?

Dr. Smesseim: I believe that it is important to critically evaluate what is already known in the literature on a specific topic. From this critical perspective, the researcher can then formulate a clear and relevant research question that builds on existing knowledge.

TLCR: Being a scientist or doctor is challenging. How do you allocate time to write research papers?

Dr. Smesseim: I rely on careful planning. This starts with creating both a long-term plan and a short-term plan for the research projects I am working on. I also make it a point to schedule dedicated writing days throughout my work week.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Ilona Tietzova

Dr. Ilona Tietzova is an assistant professor in the First Faculty of Medicine at Charles University. She brings a unique combination of clinical, academic, and research expertise. She holds board certifications in respiratory medicine, medical oncology, and palliative medicine, demonstrating her broad clinical expertise and multidisciplinary approach to complex patient care. Her PhD in Biochemistry and Pathobiochemistry provides her with a solid scientific foundation that profoundly informs her translational and clinical research. Her research team focuses on translational research in lung cancer, investigating the disease pathology at both the molecular and clinical levels.

To Dr. Tietzova, a good academic paper begins with an important question and builds trust by clearly showing what the authors did, what they found, and what they did not find. The best papers are honest about uncertainty, share the challenges, and explain how their work connects biology to patient care in enough detail for others to follow.

Dr. Tietzova believes that biases help authors clarify their ideas and share all results, not just the favorable ones. Authors should always give credit to every source, even those that challenge their views. They should show the size of the effects, not just whether they are statistically significant, and ask colleagues who might disagree to review the draft and listen closely to their feedback.

“As both a physician and researcher, I am always driven by my patients’ stories. It is important not to hesitate and let the ‘unknowns’ halt your progress. Critically think about negative data/outcomes more than the positive ones. Reflect on data that goes against your hypothesis because this may show something unique (offering a new research avenue). Science needs bold minds that explore beyond the known,” says Dr. Tietzova.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Joon Young Choi

Joon Young Choi, M.D., Ph.D., is an Assistant Professor in the Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine at Incheon St. Mary's Hospital, The Catholic University of Korea. His research primarily investigates chronic airway diseases, specifically COPD and asthma, with a focus on the mechanisms of acute exacerbations and the longitudinal decline in lung function. He employs a multidisciplinary approach that integrates large-scale clinical epidemiology, omics-based analysis, and artificial intelligence to develop predictive models and precision medicine strategies. Recently, he has expanded his work to translational research examining the impact of microplastic exposure on airway inflammation. He also serves on the editorial boards of several journals and has received multiple national and international investigator awards. 

Dr. Choi believes that academic writing offers a unique opportunity to transform clinical observations into structured knowledge that benefits both patients and the scientific community. For him, the most fascinating aspect is the process of transforming complex data into a coherent narrative that explains disease mechanisms or improves patient care. Writing forces deeper thinking: it challenges assumptions, highlights gaps in understanding, and often leads to new hypotheses. Another appealing aspect is the collaborative nature of writing; working with colleagues across countries and disciplines brings diverse perspectives, ultimately elevating the scientific message. Most importantly, academic writing enables one’s work to have a lasting impact beyond individual patients, shaping guidelines, practice patterns, and informing future research directions.

In Dr. Choi’s view, transparency regarding potential conflicts of interest is essential for maintaining scientific credibility. Disclosing Conflicts of Interest (COI) does not imply inappropriate influence; rather, it allows readers and reviewers to critically assess the work with a full understanding of the author’s professional context. In respiratory medicine, where many studies involve pharmaceutical interventions or device-based diagnostics, undisclosed relationships can raise concerns about biased interpretation or selective reporting. A COI can influence research through study design, emphasis on certain outcomes, or interpretation of borderline findings. However, clear disclosure, adherence to rigorous methodology, and independent statistical analysis can minimize such risks. Ultimately, transparent reporting strengthens trust, safeguards scientific integrity, and ensures that research conclusions remain grounded in evidence rather than external interests.

“High-quality evidence synthesis begins with clarity about the research question. I usually start by defining the clinical domain, the population of interest, and the specific outcome that the manuscript aims to address. This allows me to narrow the literature to studies with appropriate methodology, sufficient sample size, and reproducible outcomes. For diseases like COPD or asthma, where heterogeneity is substantial, it is crucial to consider cohort characteristics, follow-up duration, and operational definitions to avoid mixing incompatible data. Authors should maintain a critical attitude toward bias, ensuring that included studies have appropriate adjustment for confounders and transparent reporting. During synthesis, consistency of definitions, comparability of endpoints, and understanding the context behind conflicting results are essential. Ultimately, evidence synthesis should not simply list studies but integrate them to reveal what is clinically meaningful and applicable to real-world practice,” says Dr. Choi.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Kazuo Tsuchiya

Dr. Kazuo Tsuchiya is a physician specializing in respiratory medicine at Shizuoka Saiseikai General Hospital. His research areas include interventional pulmonology, lung cancer, respiratory care, and pulmonary circulation. Alongside daily clinical practice, he is engaged in clinical research aimed at improving diagnostic accuracy, therapeutic strategies, and patient care in respiratory diseases. Recently, his projects have focused on optimizing bronchoscopic procedures, developing biomarkers and treatment strategies for lung cancer, and better understanding pulmonary hemodynamics in critically ill patients. Bridging routine clinical practice and academic investigation is central to his career, and he strives to translate clinical questions arising at the bedside into research that contributes to evidence-based medicine.

Dr. Tsuchiya believes that clinical research is indispensable for resolving the unanswered questions that emerge during routine medical practice. Researchers have a responsibility to publish their findings so that the knowledge gained can benefit others. By continuously developing methods to address each clinical uncertainty and conducting research in a reproducible way with universal validity, they can build a body of evidence that shapes and advances future medical practice. Academic writing is the vehicle that enables this process, ensuring that insights are shared, evaluated, and transformed into collective knowledge.

Dr. Tsuchiya thinks that it is essential to constantly search for the underlying essence of the observed phenomenon in writing. Rather than accepting results at face value, one must question assumptions, explore limitations, and examine whether alternative explanations exist.

“I once realized that even when researchers conduct studies on the same topic, the points they choose to focus on and the aspects they consider important can differ greatly. This experience highlighted how personal perspectives influence academic work and how such diversity of viewpoints ultimately enriches scientific progress,” says Dr. Tsuchiya.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Shunichi Kataoka

Dr. Shunichi Kataoka is affiliated with the Department of Respiratory Medicine at Juntendo University, and currently works at Shizuoka Cancer Center in Japan. His primary research interest is clinical research in lung cancer, with a particular focus on underserved but clinically important populations, including patients with rare thoracic malignancies such as salivary gland-type tumors and thymic carcinoma, as well as those with poor performance status. Through clinical practice, he aims to address unmet clinical questions and translate them into meaningful research. In this journal, he previously published a case report exploring the mechanisms underlying spontaneous tumor regression, which further strengthened his interest in clinically driven research that bridges bedside observations and scientific inquiry.　

Dr. Kataoka believes that a good academic paper requires a clear research question, an appropriate study design, and transparent methodology. In addition to a logical structure and accurate data presentation, the manuscript should clearly describe the significance of the findings within the clinical and scientific context. In clinical research, it is essential to clearly demonstrate how the results can be applied to clinical practice.

In Dr. Kataoka’s view, authors should always write with the intended readership in mind and strive for clarity and coherence. In clinical research, it is essential to provide information that enables readers to apply the findings in clinical practice. In addition, authors should remain mindful that clinical research is made possible by the participation and cooperation of patients, and their work should be conducted and presented with gratitude and respect for those contributions.

“Clinical questions arise from daily clinical practice, and clinical research aims to address them. However, these efforts truly benefit patients only when they are shared through academic publication. By communicating even modest findings with the global community, our work can influence everyday medical care around the world. Academic writing is challenging, but I encourage all researchers to persist and work together toward the continued advancement of medicine,” says Dr. Kataoka.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Jin-Hee Park

Jin-Hee Park, PhD, RN, ACNP, is a Professor at the College of Nursing, Ajou University, Republic of Korea. Her research focuses on symptom management and the prevention of secondary health problems among patients with cancer, with the overarching goal of improving long-term outcomes across the cancer care continuum. Her work integrates large-scale analyses of clinical and administrative datasets to identify risk profiles, symptom trajectories, prognostic factors, and gaps in care. In parallel, she is engaged in the development and evaluation of AI-enabled digital health interventions, including mobile- and wearable-based programs, to support patient self-management and personalized recovery. Her recent research highlights the translation of data-driven evidence into scalable, practice-oriented interventions and care strategies aimed at improving quality of life, functional status, and survivorship outcomes for individuals living with and beyond cancer.

From Dr. Park’s perspective, a good academic paper addresses a clinically and scientifically meaningful question that is clearly grounded in existing evidence. It demonstrates methodological rigor, transparency, and internal consistency, with appropriate study design and analytic strategies aligned to the research aims. Importantly, a high-quality paper goes beyond reporting results by interpreting findings within a translational context, explaining their relevance to clinical practice, patient outcomes, or future research. Clear and precise writing, along with ethical standards, is essential for reproducibility and facilitates knowledge transfer across disciplines.

Dr. Park believes that a high-quality academic author exhibits intellectual integrity and ethical accountability by ensuring transparent and accurate reporting, free from exaggeration or omission. Authors should maintain methodological rigor by selecting appropriate study designs and analytic strategies, interpreting findings judiciously, and explicitly acknowledging limitations. They engage constructively with peer review through openness to critique and sustained commitment to manuscript revision. Finally, authors communicate with clarity and coherence, provide sufficient detail to support replicability, and articulate the implications of their work for practice, policy, and future research.

“TLCR provides a highly relevant platform that bridges basic science, clinical research, and translational application in lung cancer care. I value the journal’s focus on studies that connect mechanistic insights and clinical evidence to real-world patient outcomes, including symptom burden, recovery, and survivorship. Its rigorous peer-review process, interdisciplinary scope, and international readership make TLCR an appropriate venue for disseminating research that aims to inform evidence-based, patient-centered lung cancer care,” says Dr. Park.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Pedro Gonzalez Santa-Catalina

Dr. Pedro Gonzalez Santa-Catalina is a medical oncology resident and PhD candidate at Salamanca University Hospital and the Biomedical Research Institute of Salamanca (IBSAL), affiliated with the University of Salamanca. His research focuses on advanced and metastatic non-oncogene-addicted non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), with particular emphasis on immunotherapy in real-world clinical settings. His doctoral research focuses on characterizing long-term survivors of advanced lung cancer and evaluating the clinical utility of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) alongside other blood-based and tissue biomarkers. The goal is to improve prognostic assessments and predict treatment outcomes. By integrating clinical and molecular data through a translational approach, his research aims to enhance patient stratification and optimize treatment monitoring and decision-making in patients with advanced lung cancer. Connect with him on LinkedIn.

In Dr. Santa-Catalina’s view, academic writing is essential because it is the mechanism by which scientific knowledge is generated, validated, and transmitted. It facilitates the communication of data, methods, and interpretations in a systematic and reproducible way, allowing for critical assessment and comparison across studies. Without rigorous academic writing, research findings cannot be reliably scrutinized, replicated, or integrated into the existing body of evidence.

Dr. Santa-Catalina emphasizes that writing is essential when it actively interrogates evidence instead of merely describing it. This requires explicit justification of assumptions, methods, and interpretations; clear acknowledgment of limitations and uncertainty; and a deliberate separation between data, inference, and opinion. A critical text anticipates alternative explanations, situates findings within the existing literature, and explains not only what was done or observed, but also why it matters and where it may fall short.

“During the preparation of a review article, I initially drafted a confident interpretation of a pivotal trial based on the published abstract and primary endpoint. While revisiting the supplementary material late in the process, I noticed a subtle imbalance in post-progression treatments that materially affected the overall survival signal. This required rewriting the argument and explicitly addressing what the data could and could not support. The episode was unglamorous but instructive. It reinforced that academic writing is not about defending an initial viewpoint, but about allowing the data to dictate the final message. In practice, the most valuable revisions are often prompted by what challenges our first interpretation rather than what confirms it,” says Dr. Santa-Catalina.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Yuki Takigawa

After graduating from Ehime University in 2016, Dr. Yuki Takigawa joined the Department of Respiratory Medicine at the National Hospital Organisation (NHO) Okayama Medical Center, where he completed junior and senior residency under the supervision of Dr. Keiichi Fujiwara. He subsequently obtained board certifications in internal medicine, respiratory medicine, and bronchoscopy, and became an attending staff physician. Since 2020, he has refined his bronchoscopic techniques under the mentorship of Dr. Ken Sato (Director of Pulmonary Intervention Center). From 2022 to 2023, he undertook a fellowship at the NHO Nagoya Medical Centre, where he trained in interventional pulmonology under the guidance of Dr Masahide Oki, focusing on clinical bronchoscopic research and the management of airway stenosis. His current clinical and research interests include airway stenting for malignant airway disorders, cryobiopsy for peripheral pulmonary lesions, EBUS/EUS for mediastinal diseases, and bronchoscopic valve therapy for COPD, with an emphasis on improving diagnostic yield, post-interventional outcomes, and bronchoscopic education.

Dr. Takigawa believes that academic writing in the field of interventional pulmonology has a particularly direct impact on improving patient outcomes. By generating and sharing evidence, researchers can more accurately diagnose abnormal chest findings and effectively relieve airway stenosis in daily clinical practice. In this sense, academic writing is not an abstract exercise but a practical tool that directly benefits the patients in front of them.

As an interventional pulmonologist, Dr Takigawa routinely reviews the existing evidence and previous literature to stay updated in writing. Bronchoscopy is often performed based on individual experience, and he makes a conscious effort to practice evidence-based bronchoscopy. In parallel, he analyzes and studies his own institutional clinical practice as thoroughly as possible to generate data that may provide new insights to the field.

“During my residency, I was most fascinated by interventional pulmonology. Due to the lack of robust evidence in this field, I believe that actively participating in academic research could lead to improved care for patients with respiratory diseases.Academic activities have enabled me to connect with experts from Japan and around the world, providing direct mentorship and opportunities to observe advanced bronchoscopic procedures. Just as I benefited greatly from guidance by my mentors, my goal is to write papers together with junior colleagues and to advance interventional pulmonology as a team. Looking ahead, my motivation also includes pursuing clinical training and research opportunities overseas to further expand my perspective in interventional pulmonology,” says Dr. Takigawa.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)