World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Medicine

D-Index
81
Citations
29317
World Ranking
16478
National Ranking
8281

Cathy Eng 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 Cathy Eng 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: 610 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: 726 publications — 83rd percentile

83% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Cathy Eng 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 Cathy Eng 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: 399 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: 81 D-Index — 19th percentile

19% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Cathy Eng is affiliated with Vanderbilt University in the United States and focuses their research on medicine, particularly within oncology and related subfields. Their scholarly output includes 486 publications in medicine, with significant contributions in oncology (188 publications), surgery (97), pulmonary and respiratory medicine (83), pathology and forensic medicine (37), and cancer research (34).

The scientist's primary research topics encompass colorectal cancer treatments and studies, with 180 publications; gastric cancer management and outcomes, represented by 94 papers; colorectal and anal carcinomas, also appearing in 94 publications; genetic factors in colorectal cancer, studied in 66 works; cancer genomics and diagnostics, with 58 papers; cancer treatment and pharmacology, covered in 50 publications; and lung cancer treatments and mutations, addressed in 40 publications.

Cathy Eng frequently publishes in several well-known academic venues. These include the Journal of Clinical Oncology (61 publications), Annals of Oncology (13), The Oncologist (9), Cancers (8), and JCO Oncology Practice (5).

Their recent papers illustrate a focus on oncology and colorectal cancer management, including:

  • A Practical Approach to the Management of Cancer Patients During the Novel Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Pandemic: An International Collaborative Group (2020, The Oncologist)
  • Treatment of Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: ASCO Guideline (2022, Journal of Clinical Oncology)
  • Antiemetics: ASCO Guideline Update (2020, Journal of Clinical Oncology)
  • ctDNA applications and integration in colorectal cancer: an NCI Colon and Rectal-Anal Task Forces whitepaper (2020, Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology)
  • Fruquintinib versus placebo in patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (FRESCO-2): an international, multicentre, randomised, double-blind, phase 3 study (2023, The Lancet)

Collaboration is a notable component of this scientist's work. Frequent coauthors include Van K. Morris (37 joint publications), Arvind Dasari (30), Takayuki Yoshino (28), Josep Tabernero (27), and Sara Lonardi (22).

Best Publications

  • Chemotherapy regimen predicts steatohepatitis and an increase in 90-day mortality after surgery for hepatic colorectal metastases

    Jean Nicolas Vauthey;Timothy M. Pawlik;Dario Ribero;Tsung Teh Wu

  • Improved Survival in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Is Associated With Adoption of Hepatic Resection and Improved Chemotherapy

    Scott Kopetz;George J. Chang;Michael J. Overman;Cathy Eng

  • Effect of surgical margin status on survival and site of recurrence after hepatic resection for colorectal metastases.

    Timothy M. Pawlik;Charles R. Scoggins;Daria Zorzi;Eddie K. Abdalla

  • EPIC: Phase III Trial of Cetuximab Plus Irinotecan After Fluoropyrimidine and Oxaliplatin Failure in Patients With Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

    Alberto F. Sobrero;Joan Maurel;Louis Fehrenbacher;Werner Scheithauer

  • Antiemetics: American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline Update

    Paul J. Hesketh;Mark G. Kris;Ethan Martin Basch;Kari Bohlke

  • A Practical Approach to the Management of Cancer Patients During the Novel Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Pandemic: An International Collaborative Group.

    Humaid O. Al-Shamsi;Waleed Alhazzani;Ahmad Alhuraiji;Eric A. Coomes

  • Pathologic Response to Preoperative Chemotherapy: A New Outcome End Point After Resection of Hepatic Colorectal Metastases

    Dan G. Blazer;Yoji Kishi;Dipen M. Maru;Scott Kopetz

  • Atezolizumab with or without cobimetinib versus regorafenib in previously treated metastatic colorectal cancer (IMblaze370): a multicentre, open-label, phase 3, randomised, controlled trial

    Cathy Eng;Tae Won Kim;Johanna Bendell;Guillem Argilés

  • American Society of Clinical Oncology 2009 clinical evidence review on radiofrequency ablation of hepatic metastases from colorectal cancer.

    Sandra L. Wong;Pamela B. Mangu;Michael A. Choti;Todd S. Crocenzi

  • Neoadjuvant Treatment Response As an Early Response Indicator for Patients With Rectal Cancer

    In Ja Park;Y. Nancy You;Atin Agarwal;John M. Skibber

  • Bevacizumab improves pathologic response and protects against hepatic injury in patients treated with oxaliplatin‐based chemotherapy for colorectal liver metastases

    Dario Ribero;Huamin Wang;Matteo Donadon;Daria Zorzi

  • Phase II trial of infusional fluorouracil, irinotecan, and bevacizumab for metastatic colorectal cancer: efficacy and circulating angiogenic biomarkers associated with therapeutic resistance.

    Scott Kopetz;Paulo M. Hoff;Jeffrey S. Morris;Robert A. Wolff

  • High Survival Rate After Two-Stage Resection of Advanced Colorectal Liver Metastases: Response-Based Selection and Complete Resection Define Outcome

    Antoine Brouquet;Eddie K. Abdalla;Scott Kopetz;Christopher R. Garrett

  • Predictors of tumor response and downstaging in patients who receive preoperative chemoradiation for rectal cancer.

    Prajnan Das;John M. Skibber;Miguel A. Rodriguez-Bigas;Barry W. Feig

  • Nivolumab for previously treated unresectable metastatic anal cancer (NCI9673): a multicentre, single-arm, phase 2 study.

    Van K. Morris;Mohamed E. Salem;Halla Nimeiri;Syma Iqbal

  • ctDNA applications and integration in colorectal cancer: an NCI Colon and Rectal-Anal Task Forces whitepaper.

    Arvind Dasari;Van K. Morris;Carmen J. Allegra;Chloe Atreya

  • Antiemetics: ASCO Guideline Update.

    Paul J. Hesketh;Mark G. Kris;Ethan Basch;Kari Bohlke

  • Phase II Study of Capecitabine and Oxaliplatin for Advanced Adenocarcinoma of the Small Bowel and Ampulla of Vater

    Michael J. Overman;Gauri R. Varadhachary;Scott Kopetz;Rosni Adinin

  • Classifying colorectal cancer by tumor location rather than sidedness highlights a continuum in mutation profiles and consensus molecular subtypes

    Jonathan M Loree;Allan Al Pereira;Michael Lam;Alexandra N Willauer

  • Characterizing the patterns of clonal selection in circulating tumor DNA from patients with colorectal cancer refractory to anti-EGFR treatment

    M. P. Morelli;M. J. Overman;A. Dasari;S. M.A. Kazmi

Frequent Co-Authors

Michael J. Overman
Michael J. Overman The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center
Scott Kopetz
Scott Kopetz The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center
Robert A. Wolff
Robert A. Wolff The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center
George J. Chang
George J. Chang The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center
Miguel A. Rodriguez-Bigas
Miguel A. Rodriguez-Bigas The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center
John M. Skibber
John M. Skibber The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center
Christopher H. Crane
Christopher H. Crane Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center
Sunil Krishnan
Sunil Krishnan The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center
Funda Meric-Bernstam
Funda Meric-Bernstam The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center
Filip Janku
Filip Janku The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center

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

Exploring medicine in the USA opens numerous alternative and related healthcare careers, many of which do not always require an MD. For instance, medical billing and coding online schools that accept financial aid offer flexible, in-demand programs that can be completed remotely, making healthcare roles accessible to more students.

Nursing is another popular route. Some do you have to take the teas test to get into nursing school programs have waived traditional entrance exams, streamlining entry into the field. If you’re interested in moving into healthcare management, consider a degree in healthcare administration, which can prepare you for non-clinical leadership roles in the industry.

Registered nurses seeking career growth may benefit from an advanced degree pathway such as an rn to np bridge. These programs accelerate qualified nurses into higher-level practitioner roles, combining clinical expertise with autonomy and increased earning potential.

Best Scientists Citing Cathy Eng

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles