[Skip to Content]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address 35.175.191.168. Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
[Skip to Content Landing]
Views 2,101
Citations 0
Editorial
March 21, 2019

JAMA Oncology—The Year in Review, 2018

Author Affiliations
  • 1Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, University of Washington, Seattle
  • 2Editor, JAMA Oncology
JAMA Oncol. 2019;5(5):609-610. doi:10.1001/jamaoncol.2019.0231

2018 has been an exciting year for JAMA Oncology. Our impact factor of 20.9 placed us as one of the highest-ranking oncology journals. We would like to thank our authors, reviewers,1 and readers for the significant contributions made to the journal this past year. The editorial board, our JAMA Oncology editors, and I are honored to have the opportunity to serve the oncology community by offering original, innovative, and timely scientific content that has a direct impact on researchers, clinicians, and the patients we serve.

I would like to thank our authors. In 2018, we published 270 major manuscripts, including 119 Original Investigations, 40 Brief Reports, 51 Research Letters, and 31 Viewpoints. We published 49 reports of clinical trials, which is nearly double the number published in 2017. The quality of our published manuscripts is reflected in the more than 1.7 million users who have come to our website to access content and more than 13 000 media mentions of JAMA Oncology articles in print, online, and from broadcast news services this past year. Choosing articles for the journal was challenging. We received 2604 manuscript submissions in 2018—an impressive 25% increase in submissions from 2017. These submissions included 2256 Original Investigations, 225 clinical trial reports, 166 meta-analyses, and 91 reviews.

In 2018, the overall acceptance rate was 10%. Our acceptance rate for Original Investigations was 6%, 18% for clinical trials, and 3% for meta-analyses. We accepted 18% of submitted Research Letters, 30% of Viewpoints, and 19% of Clinical Challenges. JAMA Oncology is indexed in MEDLINE, Web of Science, Scopus, and many other databases, and all research articles are deposited into PubMed Central. More statistics about our content are displayed in the Table.2-9

Table.  
JAMA Oncology Statistics for 2018
JAMA Oncology Statistics for 2018

We also thank our global consortium of peer reviewers who contributed to the journal this year. We are pleased to acknowledge their contribution to JAMA Oncology by publishing the names of the more than 900 experts who completed a manuscript review in 2018. This group of renowned laboratory, clinical, quantitative, and statistical scientists provided comprehensive reviews of the submitted manuscripts in a median of just 14 days. Their timely and high-quality work for the journal has allowed JAMA Oncology to maintain an impressive median time from receipt of a manuscript to acceptance of 64 days. The ability to rapidly review and return a decision on our submissions ensures that authors receive a detailed and efficient service in reviewing their work and that those important findings are available to the oncology community as quickly as possible. We would not be able to provide this service without our expert peer reviewers and their commitment to providing prompt and high-quality reviews for the journal.

Finally, we thank our readers. We email our Table of Contents of newly published material each week to 32 822 readers. We are proud to continue to offer the most innovative, provocative, and timely research for scientists, clinicians, and trainees in the field of oncology worldwide. We encourage our readers to stay involved with the journal by submitting Letters to the Editor and offering recommendations for new topics that they would like to see covered in future issues. Your suggestions make this interdisciplinary oncology journal dynamic and current.

We have truly enjoyed being involved in JAMA Oncology’s continued success this year and look forward to the year ahead. We could not have done it without you. We invite all of our readers to sign up to receive the emails of our Table of Contents at http://www.jamaoncology.com, follow us on Twitter @JAMAOnc, or friend us on Facebook. We will keep you up to date on the most important discoveries influencing cancer care.

Back to top
Article Information

Corresponding Author: Mary L. (Nora) Disis, MD, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, University of Washington, 850 Republican St, Brotman 221, Box 358050, Seattle, WA 98195 (ndisis@uw.edu).

Published Online: March 21, 2019. doi:10.1001/jamaoncol.2019.0231

Conflict of Interest Disclosures: Dr Disis reports receiving grant support from Janssen, EMD Serono, Pfizer, Epithany, Seattle Genetics, Silverback Therapeutics, Celgene, and Epiphany and royalties from the University of Washington.

References
1.
 JAMA Oncology peer reviewers in 2018 [published online March 21, 2019].  JAMA Oncol. doi:10.1001/jamaoncol.2019.0109Google Scholar
2.
Johnson  SB, Park  HS, Gross  CP, Yu  JB.  Complementary medicine, refusal of conventional cancer therapy, and survival among patients with curable cancers.  JAMA Oncol. 2018;4(10):1375-1381. doi:10.1001/jamaoncol.2018.2487PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
3.
Schoemaker  MJ, Nichols  HB, Wright  LB,  et al; Premenopausal Breast Cancer Collaborative Group.  Association of body mass index and age with subsequent breast cancer risk in premenopausal women.  JAMA Oncol. 2018;4(11):e181771. doi:10.1001/jamaoncol.2018.1771PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
4.
Barnard  ME, Poole  EM, Curhan  GC,  et al.  Association of analgesic use with risk of ovarian cancer in the Nurses’ Health Studies.  JAMA Oncol. 2018;4(12):1675-1682. doi:10.1001/jamaoncol.2018.4149PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
5.
Gupta  A, Moore  JA.  Tumor lysis syndrome.  JAMA Oncol. 2018;4(6):895.Google ScholarCrossref
6.
Global Burden of Disease Cancer Collaboration.  Global, regional, and national cancer incidence, mortality, years of life lost, years lived with disability, and disability-adjusted life-years for 29 cancer groups, 1990 to 2016: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study.  JAMA Oncol. 2018;4(11):1553-1568.Google ScholarCrossref
7.
Fuchs  CS, Doi  T, Jang  TW,  et al.  Safety and efficacy of pembrolizumab monotherapy in patients with previously treated advanced gastric and gastroesophageal junction cancer: phase 2 clinical KEYNOTE-059 trial.  JAMA Oncol. 2018;4(5):e180013.Google ScholarCrossref
8.
Haratani  K, Hayashi  H, Chiba  Y,  et al.  Association of immune-related averse events with nivolumab efficacy in non–small-cell lung cancer.  JAMA Oncol. 2018;4(3):374-378.Google ScholarCrossref
9.
Lee  CK, Man  J, Cooper  W,  et al.  Clinical and molecular characteristics associated with survival among patients treated with checkpoint inhibitors for advanced non–small cell lung carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis.  JAMA Oncol. 2018;4(2):210-216.Google ScholarCrossref
×