World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Medicine

D-Index
76
Citations
19559
World Ranking
18844
National Ranking
9391

Arthur I. Sagalowsky publication distribution in Medicine in 2026

The chart shows the distribution of publications by all Research.com ranked scientists in the field of Medicine in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Arthur I. Sagalowsky sits on this spectrum.

101–120 publications: 5 scientists 121–140 publications: 26 scientists 141–160 publications: 73 scientists 161–180 publications: 155 scientists 181–200 publications: 230 scientists 201–220 publications: 363 scientists 221–240 publications: 487 scientists 241–260 publications: 545 scientists 261–280 publications: 722 scientists 281–300 publications: 768 scientists 301–320 publications: 834 scientists 321–340 publications: 895 scientists 341–360 publications: 922 scientists 361–380 publications: 838 scientists 381–400 publications: 861 scientists 401–420 publications: 918 scientists 421–440 publications: 806 scientists 441–460 publications: 771 scientists 461–480 publications: 751 scientists 481–500 publications: 713 scientists 501–520 publications: 617 scientists 521–540 publications: 611 scientists 541–560 publications: 537 scientists 561–580 publications: 504 scientists 581–600 publications: 509 scientists 601–620 publications: 396 scientists 621–640 publications: 386 scientists 641–660 publications: 371 scientists 661–680 publications: 340 scientists 681–700 publications: 336 scientists 701–720 publications: 307 scientists 721–740 publications: 259 scientists 741–760 publications: 230 scientists 761–780 publications: 228 scientists 781–800 publications: 217 scientists 801–820 publications: 204 scientists 821–840 publications: 186 scientists 841–860 publications: 177 scientists 861–880 publications: 155 scientists 881–900 publications: 139 scientists 901–920 publications: 145 scientists 921–940 publications: 116 scientists 941–960 publications: 133 scientists 961–980 publications: 91 scientists 981–1,000 publications: 96 scientists 1,001–1,020 publications: 77 scientists 1,021–1,040 publications: 70 scientists 1,041–1,060 publications: 63 scientists 1,061–1,080 publications: 77 scientists 1,081–1,100 publications: 49 scientists 1,101–1,120 publications: 54 scientists 1,121–1,140 publications: 49 scientists 1,141–1,160 publications: 51 scientists 1,161–1,180 publications: 35 scientists 1,181–1,200 publications: 39 scientists 1,201–1,220 publications: 26 scientists 1,221–1,240 publications: 37 scientists 1,241–1,260 publications: 36 scientists 1,261–1,280 publications: 27 scientists 1,281–1,300 publications: 32 scientists 1,301–1,320 publications: 28 scientists 1,321–1,340 publications: 17 scientists 1,341–1,360 publications: 30 scientists 1,361–1,380 publications: 28 scientists 1,381–1,400 publications: 17 scientists 1,401–1,420 publications: 21 scientists 1,421–1,440 publications: 15 scientists 1,441–1,460 publications: 12 scientists 1,461–1,480 publications: 12 scientists 1,481–1,500 publications: 18 scientists 1,501–1,520 publications: 14 scientists 1,521–1,540 publications: 17 scientists 1,541–1,560 publications: 15 scientists 1,561–1,580 publications: 6 scientists 1,581–1,600 publications: 2 scientists 1,601–1,620 publications: 12 scientists 1,621–1,640 publications: 11 scientists 1,641–1,660 publications: 8 scientists 1,661–1,680 publications: 5 scientists 1,681–1,700 publications: 5 scientists 1,701–1,720 publications: 10 scientists 1,721–1,740 publications: 12 scientists 1,741–1,760 publications: 14 scientists 1,761–1,780 publications: 6 scientists 1,781–1,795 publications: 5 scientists 1,796+ publications: 100 scientists
101 publications 1,796+

This scientist: 336 publications — 24th percentile

24% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 1,796 publications or more.

Arthur I. Sagalowsky D-index placement in Medicine in 2026

The chart shows the D-index (discipline H-index) distribution of Medicine scientists ranked by Research.com in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Arthur I. Sagalowsky sits on this spectrum.

70–71 D-Index: 226 scientists 72–73 D-Index: 391 scientists 74–75 D-Index: 574 scientists 76–77 D-Index: 730 scientists 78–79 D-Index: 891 scientists 80–81 D-Index: 972 scientists 82–83 D-Index: 1,027 scientists 84–85 D-Index: 1,003 scientists 86–87 D-Index: 960 scientists 88–89 D-Index: 970 scientists 90–91 D-Index: 922 scientists 92–93 D-Index: 839 scientists 94–95 D-Index: 808 scientists 96–97 D-Index: 779 scientists 98–99 D-Index: 668 scientists 100–101 D-Index: 611 scientists 102–103 D-Index: 630 scientists 104–105 D-Index: 513 scientists 106–107 D-Index: 541 scientists 108–109 D-Index: 445 scientists 110–111 D-Index: 429 scientists 112–113 D-Index: 400 scientists 114–115 D-Index: 393 scientists 116–117 D-Index: 318 scientists 118–119 D-Index: 302 scientists 120–121 D-Index: 287 scientists 122–123 D-Index: 255 scientists 124–125 D-Index: 256 scientists 126–127 D-Index: 252 scientists 128–129 D-Index: 230 scientists 130–131 D-Index: 179 scientists 132–133 D-Index: 168 scientists 134–135 D-Index: 163 scientists 136–137 D-Index: 159 scientists 138–139 D-Index: 134 scientists 140–141 D-Index: 134 scientists 142–143 D-Index: 118 scientists 144–145 D-Index: 109 scientists 146–147 D-Index: 106 scientists 148–149 D-Index: 74 scientists 150–151 D-Index: 79 scientists 152–153 D-Index: 80 scientists 154–155 D-Index: 87 scientists 156–157 D-Index: 57 scientists 158–159 D-Index: 74 scientists 160–161 D-Index: 69 scientists 162–163 D-Index: 60 scientists 164–165 D-Index: 53 scientists 166–167 D-Index: 39 scientists 168–169 D-Index: 42 scientists 170–171 D-Index: 32 scientists 172–173 D-Index: 39 scientists 174–175 D-Index: 40 scientists 176–177 D-Index: 28 scientists 178–179 D-Index: 19 scientists 180–181 D-Index: 23 scientists 182–183 D-Index: 31 scientists 184–185 D-Index: 18 scientists 186–187 D-Index: 20 scientists 188–189 D-Index: 22 scientists 190–191 D-Index: 13 scientists 192–193 D-Index: 21 scientists 194–195 D-Index: 12 scientists 196–197 D-Index: 12 scientists 198–199 D-Index: 14 scientists 200–201 D-Index: 15 scientists 202–203 D-Index: 13 scientists 204–205 D-Index: 10 scientists 206–207 D-Index: 8 scientists 208–209 D-Index: 4 scientists 210–211 D-Index: 12 scientists 212–213 D-Index: 11 scientists 214–215 D-Index: 10 scientists 216 D-Index: 4 scientists 217+ D-Index: 98 scientists
70 D-Index 217+

This scientist: 76 D-Index — 8th percentile

8% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 217 D-Index or more.

Overview

Arthur I. Sagalowsky is affiliated with The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center in the United States. Their research primarily focuses on medical fields, with a significant emphasis on surgery and cancer-related studies.

The scientist's work spans several subfields of medicine, including:

  • Surgery
  • Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine
  • Cancer Research
  • Urology
  • Oncology

The main topics covered by Sagalowsky's research include:

  • Bladder and Urothelial Cancer Treatments
  • Urinary and Genital Oncology Studies
  • Renal cell carcinoma treatment
  • Cancer Genomics and Diagnostics
  • Urological Disorders and Treatments
  • Renal and related cancers
  • Multiple and Secondary Primary Cancers

The scientist has published extensively in various journals, with frequent venues including:

  • Urologic Oncology Seminars and Original Investigations
  • The Journal of Urology
  • Nature Communications
  • Journal of Clinical Oncology
  • Cancer

Recent notable publications authored or coauthored by Arthur I. Sagalowsky are:

  • Improved survival after cytoreductive nephrectomy for metastatic renal cell carcinoma in the contemporary immunotherapy era: An analysis of the National Cancer Database, 2020, Urologic Oncology Seminars and Original Investigations
  • Determinants of renal cell carcinoma invasion and metastatic competence, 2021, Nature Communications
  • SWOG S1011: A phase III surgical trial to evaluate the benefit of a standard versus an extended lymphadenectomy performed at time of radical cystectomy for muscle invasive urothelial cancer, 2023, Journal of Clinical Oncology
  • Overcoming sociodemographic factors in the care of patients with testicular cancer at a safety net hospital, 2020, Cancer
  • Does grossly complete transurethral resection improve response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy?, 2020, Urologic Oncology Seminars and Original Investigations

Sagalowsky frequently collaborates with other researchers, including:

  • Vitaly Margulis
  • Yair Lotan
  • Solomon L. Woldu
  • Nirmish Singla
  • Aditya Bagrodia

Best Publications

  • BAP1 loss defines a new class of renal cell carcinoma

    Samuel Peña-Llopis;Silvia Vega-Rubín-De-Celis;Silvia Vega-Rubín-De-Celis;Arnold Liao;Nan Leng

  • Prognostic factors, recurrence, and survival in transitional cell carcinoma of the upper urinary tract: a 30-year experience in 252 patients

    M.Craig Hall;Sean Womack;Arthur I Sagalowsky;Thomas Carmody

  • Outcomes of radical cystectomy for transitional cell carcinoma of the bladder: a contemporary series from the Bladder Cancer Research Consortium.

    Shahrokh F. Shariat;Pierre I. Karakiewicz;Ganesh S. Palapattu;Yair Lotan

  • Androgen-deprivation therapy in prostate cancer and cardiovascular risk: a science advisory from the American Heart Association, American Cancer Society, and American Urological Association: endorsed by the American Society for Radiation Oncology.

    Glenn N. Levine;Anthony V. D'Amico;Peter Berger;Peter E. Clark

  • Discrepancy between Clinical and Pathologic Stage: Impact on Prognosis after Radical Cystectomy

    Shahrokh F. Shariat;Ganesh S. Palapattu;Pierre I. Karakiewicz;Craig G. Rogers

  • Spectrum of diverse genomic alterations define non-clear cell renal carcinoma subtypes.

    Steffen Durinck;Eric W. Stawiski;Andrea Pavía-Jiménez;Zora Modrusan

  • Nomograms Provide Improved Accuracy for Predicting Survival after Radical Cystectomy

    Shahrokh F. Shariat;Pierre I. Karakiewicz;Ganesh S. Palapattu;Gilad E. Amiel

  • Lymphovascular Invasion is Independently Associated With Overall Survival, Cause-Specific Survival, and Local and Distant Recurrence in Patients With Negative Lymph Nodes at Radical Cystectomy

    Y. Lotan;A. Gupta;S.F. Shariat;G.S. Palapattu

  • Use of combined apoptosis biomarkers for prediction of bladder cancer recurrence and mortality after radical cystectomy

    Jose Antonio Karam;Yair Lotan;Pierre I. Karakiewicz;Raheela Ashfaq

  • Nomogram for predicting disease recurrence after radical cystectomy for transitional cell carcinoma of the bladder.

    Pierre I. Karakiewicz;Shahrokh F. Shariat;Ganesh S. Palapattu;Amiel E. Gilad

  • Characteristics and outcomes of patients with clinical T1 grade 3 urothelial carcinoma treated with radical cystectomy: results from an international cohort.

    Hans Martin Fritsche;Maximilian Burger;Robert S. Svatek;Claudio Jeldres

  • Multiple biomarkers improve prediction of bladder cancer recurrence and mortality in patients undergoing cystectomy

    Shahrokh F. Shariat;Shahrokh F. Shariat;Pierre I. Karakiewicz;Raheela Ashfaq;Seth P. Lerner

  • Multicenter Phase 2 Trial of Sirolimus for Tuberous Sclerosis: Kidney Angiomyolipomas and Other Tumors Regress and VEGF- D Levels Decrease

    Sandra L. Dabora;David Neal Franz;Stephen Ashwal;Arthur I Sagalowsky

  • The Impact of Targeted Molecular Therapies on the Level of Renal Cell Carcinoma Vena Caval Tumor Thrombus

    Nicholas G. Cost;Scott E. Delacroix;Joshua P. Sleeper;Paul J. Smith

  • Soft Tissue Surgical Margin Status is a Powerful Predictor of Outcomes After Radical Cystectomy: A Multicenter Study of More Than 4,400 Patients

    Giacomo Novara;Robert S Svatek;Pierre I Karakiewicz;Eila Skinner

  • Histopathology of surgically managed renal tumors: analysis of a contemporary series.

    David A Duchene;Yair Lotan;Jeffrey A Cadeddu;Arthur I Sagalowsky

  • Clinical Outcomes Following Radical Cystectomy for Primary Nontransitional Cell Carcinoma of the Bladder Compared to Transitional Cell Carcinoma of the Bladder

    Craig G. Rogers;Ganesh S. Palapattu;Shahrokh F. Shariat;Pierre I. Karakiewicz

  • Ki-67 is an independent predictor of bladder cancer outcome in patients treated with radical cystectomy for organ-confined disease.

    Vitaly Margulis;Shahrokh F. Shariat;Raheela Ashfaq;Arthur I. Sagalowsky

  • A Validated Tumorgraft Model Reveals Activity of Dovitinib Against Renal Cell Carcinoma

    Sharanya Sivanand;Samuel Peña-Llopis;Hong Zhao;Blanka Kucejova

  • Survivin expression is associated with bladder cancer presence, stage, progression, and mortality

    Shahrokh F. Shariat;Raheela Ashfaq;Pierre I. Karakiewicz;Osamah Saeedi

Frequent Co-Authors

Yair Lotan
Yair Lotan The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center
Shahrokh F. Shariat
Shahrokh F. Shariat Medical University of Vienna
Christopher G. Wood
Christopher G. Wood The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center
Patrick J. Bastian
Patrick J. Bastian Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München
Pierre I. Karakiewicz
Pierre I. Karakiewicz University of Montreal
Wassim Kassouf
Wassim Kassouf McGill University
Jay D. Raman
Jay D. Raman Penn State Milton S. Hershey Medical Center
Francesco Montorsi
Francesco Montorsi Vita-Salute San Raffaele University
Richard Zigeuner
Richard Zigeuner Medical University of Graz
Yves Fradet
Yves Fradet Université Laval

If you think any of the details on this page are incorrect, let us know.

Report an issue

We appreciate your kind effort to assist us to improve this page, it would be helpful providing us with as much detail as possible in the text box below:

Related Online Degrees & Career Pathways

Studying Medicine in the USA doesn’t always mean following the traditional path to becoming a doctor. There are numerous alternative career options and online degree programs that play vital roles in the healthcare industry. For example, those interested in administrative roles may consider pursuing the best online healthcare administration degree, which prepares students for management and leadership roles in hospitals and clinics.

Entry into healthcare can also be achieved through specialized training. Programs at medical billing and coding online schools teach essential skills for handling patient records and insurance claims, offering a fast track into the field. Aspiring nurses have flexible options as well; it is possible to enroll in an lpn school without teas test requirements, making the process of becoming a Licensed Practical Nurse more accessible.

For registered nurses looking to advance, there are also asn to fnp bridge programs, which enable career growth from associate degree to nurse practitioner roles. Exploring these pathways opens numerous rewarding opportunities within healthcare, tailored to different interests and educational backgrounds.

Best Scientists Citing Arthur I. Sagalowsky

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles