In 2024, many TBCR 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 who have been making immense efforts in their research fields, with a brief interview of their unique perspective and insightful view as authors.
Outstanding Authors (2024)
Mara A. Piltin, Mayo Clinic, USA
Eleonora Nicolò, Weill Cornell Medicine, USA
Andrew A. Davis, Washington University in St. Louis, USA
Beat Thürlimann, SwissBreastCare, Switzerland
Christine Lee, Mayo Clinic, USA
Outstanding Author
Mara A. Piltin
Dr. Mara A. Piltin is an Assistant Professor of Surgery at Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota, in the Division of Breast and Melanoma Surgical Oncology. She has an interest in clinical outcomes research, innovative surgical techniques, and a passion for education. She is actively involved in the FDA clinical trial evaluating the robotic nipple-sparing mastectomy technique. Recent publications include outcomes for melanoma patients and breast cancer patients. As a member of the I-SPY2 locoregional working group, she has utilized the data from this large multi-center clinical trial to ask important surgical questions. She currently serves as an Associate Program Director for both the Mayo Clinic General Surgery Residency Program and the Mayo Clinic Breast Surgical Oncology Fellowship. She has an interest in complex patient review and co-leads both the breast and cutaneous oncology disease site tumor boards for her institution. Connect with Dr. Piltin on LinkedIn and Twitter/X @DrMaraPiltin.
The essential elements of a good academic paper, according to Dr. Piltin, are rooted in the question being asked. A strong study design has a clear academic hypothesis and acknowledges a gap in the existing literature. That academic question is then asked in a way that can be answered. She highlights it is important to focus on a consistent subject matter or patient population so that the results can be interpreted clearly. Additionally, a key component of a good academic paper is practicality. She adds, “Real-world applications are a fantastic way to translate strong academics into advancing our fields.”
During preparation of a paper, Dr. Piltin indicates that authors must remember to do one’s best to account for bias. In her opinion, there are many types of bias introduced when writing a paper, and focusing on minimizing bias will give the best quality scientific product. Another important component is clear communication of the science being performed so that the reader can interpret the methods utilized and the results obtained. She believes authors should also acknowledge and be familiar with the relevant literature available on the subject matter to ensure their contribution is novel, additive, and valuable to the current landscape.
“Publishing in TBCR is a great opportunity to share our work with a field of subspecialists interested in similar oncologic academic content,” says Dr. Piltin.
(by Brad Li, Alisa Lu)
Eleonora Nicolò
Eleonora Nicolò is a medical oncologist specializing in breast cancer and translational research. She completed her fellowship at the European Institute of Oncology (Milan, Italy) in the New Drugs and Early Drug Development for Innovative Therapies Division, honing skills in managing and conducting early-phase clinical trials. Passionate about breast cancer research, Dr. Nicolò joined Dr. Massimo Cristofanilli’s Laboratory at Weill Cornell Medicine (New York, USA) in September 2022, focusing on applications of liquid biopsy in breast cancer. As a research fellow, she is dedicated to investigating circulating biomarkers, particularly circulating tumor cells and tumor-derived extracellular vesicles, to advance understanding and treatment strategies for breast cancer patients. Connect with her on X, and learn more about her research here.
TBCR: What are the most commonly encountered difficulties in academic writing?
Dr. Nicolò: Academic writing can present multiple challenges. When writing articles, it is essential to formulate meaningful research questions, choose the best way to answer them, analyze and interpret results critically, and ensure that the research is comprehensible to others. Authors often struggle to make complex ideas understandable without oversimplifying them, trying to balance clarity and conciseness in reporting data. Ensuring a smooth flow of ideas can be difficult as well. Another challenge is related to the selection of the sources. With the increasing volume of published works, being up-to-date and identifying the most relevant and reliable evidence can be arduous. Moreover, developing critical thinking skills is essential in academic writing to analyze and contextualize others' research findings, rather than simply describe them. Effectively managing time between clinical responsibilities, research, writing, and revising in order to meet deadlines is also a common difficulty.
TBCR: Academic writing often involves evidence synthesis. Can you share tips on selecting the appropriate evidence for synthesis and analysis?
Dr. Nicolò: Academic writing often involves evidence synthesis, which requires careful consideration in selecting appropriate material. To begin, it is essential to conduct a thorough literature review to grasp the existing knowledge on the topic. When analyzing previously published works, it is important to critically evaluate strengths and weaknesses, taking into account factors like sample size, methodology, and potential biases. Given the growing volume of published works, it is crucial to carefully analyze the credibility and reliability of the sources; peer-reviewed journals, renowned publishers, and expert’s work should be prioritized. Also, depending on the field, more recent evidence might be more relevant, but it is important to remember that initial theories that formed the basis of your research as well as seminal works should not be overlooked. Finally, it is important to incorporate a variety of viewpoints and perspectives in order to ensure a balanced analysis, avoid bias, and offer a comprehensive understanding of the topic.
TBCR: Is it important for authors to disclose Conflict of Interest (COI)? To what extent would a COI influence a research?
Dr. Nicolò: In academic research, writers must disclose COIs because these can impact the research findings or how they are reported. Acknowledging any potential COI helps maintain the objectivity, integrity, and credibility of the research. Disclosure of COI is important to allow readers to evaluate if there may be bias in the research results or interpretation. By demonstrating openness about factors that might influence the work, disclosure of COI also builds trust with the reader. Indeed, even if a COI does not directly influence the research, the perception of bias can undermine its credibility, making transparency essential to mitigate such perceptions. To minimize the impact of COI on research, collaboration among researchers, institutions, and reviewers is imperative. This involves disclosing external interests, subjecting research to rigorous peer review, and implementing oversight procedures. In essence, disclosing COI is an ethical responsibility and a key aspect of maintaining the integrity of academic research, thereby preserving its credibility and trustworthiness.
(by Brad Li, Alisa Lu)
Andrew A. Davis
Dr. Davis is a breast medical oncologist. He completed his residency and hematology/oncology training at Northwestern University in Chicago, Illinois, including serving as a Chief Fellow during his final year of training. In 2020, he was appointed as an Assistant Professor of Medicine at Washington University in St. Louis. As a clinical investigator, his primary research interests include circulating tumor DNA and the development of novel therapies for patients with metastatic breast cancer through innovative early-phase clinical trials. His recent publications have analyzed the potential clinical utility of liquid biopsies for risk stratification and serial disease monitoring.
The keys to academic writing, in Dr. Davis’ opinion, include accurately conveying a hypothesis, putting the scientific work into context within the field, and writing in a concise manner. A common difficulty encountered in academic writing is having adequate time to think, write, and revise scientific articles, as many clinical investigators are balancing multiple roles including responsibilities related to clinical care, research, education, and mentorship. He adds, “When writing an article, I try to limit distractions and block off times in my schedule to focus exclusively on reading pertinent articles, analyzing data, and writing.”
Academic writing often involves evidence synthesis. According to Dr. Davis, accurate synthesis of the literature requires extensive reading and knowledge of the primary literature. This enables a researcher to understand the historical context of the field to provide a basis of how the current work adds new information to the scientific literature. Through this process, it is essential to critically appraise articles in the scientific literature to formulate unanswered questions, future directions, and potential gaps in the existing literature. Through critical appraisal of the literature, this process will ultimately lead researchers to develop scientific questions while also improving an individual’s critical thinking skills.
In addition, Dr. Davis indicates that accurately reporting Conflict of Interest (COI) information is essential in academic writing. This ensures that authors convey to the audience of a presentation or readers of a scientific article how the work may or may not be influenced by personal and financial interests. COI disclosure should be a transparent process to maintain academic integrity. Conferences and journals may have different policies for reporting COI, and therefore reporting in an accurate manner is important based on the specific guidelines of the meeting or journal.
(by Brad Li, Masaki Lo)
Beat Thürlimann
Prof. Beat Thürlimann is board-certified in internal medicine and oncology/hematology. He served for many years as President of the Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research SAKK and of the International Breast Cancer Study Group IBCSG as well as Deputy Editor-in-Chief of the European Journal of Cancer. During his professional life, he advised several institutions in the public health sector such as cancer registries, quality assurance committee of mammography screening, Cancer League, Swiss Federal Office of Public Health and many other. He is also a Co-organizer of the St. Gallen Breast Cancer Conferences and St. Gallen Consensus Meeting. His clinical work has focused on breast cancer and gynecological tumors for more than 40 years. He works presently with SwissBreastCare in Zürich, Switzerland, as Senior Expert Consultant. More information about Prof. Thürlimann can be found here.
In Prof. Thürlimann’s opinion, there is a large spectrum of essential elements of an academic paper, but not all might be covered in one manuscript. Good academic papers generally include meaningful research results on biology and understanding of the disease and its host rather than to focus on latest results which are likely to be old in 2 or 3 years. Such papers should be well written, concise and easy to understand even for non-subspecialists. Furthermore, they should guarantee open access.
In constructing a paper, Prof. Thürlimann believes it is important for authors to focus on the message, which is concisely written, rather than including all aspects. This will allow rapid communication and avoid undue delay, which is not infrequently seen with publication of academic papers. And last but not least, the lead author needs to push continuously to get the manuscript submitted in reasonable time.
“TBCR is a young entity open for new avenues, with service-oriented staff who gives rapid feedback. And the journal is open access, facilitating scientific communication,” says Prof. Thürlimann.
(by Brad Li, Masaki Lo)
Christine U. Lee
Christine Lee, MD, PhD, is a Consultant in the Department of Radiology at Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA. With nearly two decades of experience, she is dedicated to patient care and advancing imaging techniques. She has developed innovative solutions, such as contrast-enhanced ultrasound lymphography to identify superficial lymphatic vessels in patients with extremity lymphedema, developed MRI-guided procedural techniques and a thoracic MRI protocol, and improved procedural and therapeutic techniques for challenging patients. Dr. Lee leads a team creating online teaching modules in Breast Ultrasound and actively mentors residents, several of whom have published research and earned prestigious awards, including the RSNA Radiology Resident Research Award. As an NIH R01-funded researcher, she focuses on optimizing ultrasound detection of breast biopsy markers. She fosters global collaboration, engaging with multidisciplinary investigators worldwide. Her contributions exemplify a commitment to advancing medical science and improving patient outcomes through innovation, research, and mentorship.
TBCR: What role does academic writing play in science?
Dr. Lee: More so than ever before, the rapidity of technical innovation and applications has spun feedback loops that translate to improved patient care. As physicians, continuing education and doing our best to keep up with best practices are critical—some things are missed if they never cross our minds. Peer-reviewed academic manuscripts play a key role in communicating data-driven results.
TBCR: How to ensure that one’s writing is critical?
Dr. Lee: Writing academic manuscripts, especially critical ones, can be challenging and require a lot of practice…and courage. I myself am still honing my skills in this area. I have found that seeking feedback from colleagues who are equally committed to research can be incredibly helpful in improving both the process and the final product.
TBCR: Why is it important for a research to apply for institutional review board (IRB) approval?
Dr. Lee: Researchers conducting studies involving humans bear a critical responsibility to protect the rights, privacy, and safety of those who participate in research studies. While the principal investigator (PI) holds ultimate accountability for the conduct of the study and the design of the study to minimize risks and ensure protection to the subjects, the IRB serves as a partner ensuring that the regulatory and ethical requirements are met. Without IRB approval, which involves scrutinizing every detail to ensure compliance with ethical guidelines, it will be difficult to uphold the highest standards of ethical research.
(by Brad Li, Masaki Lo)