World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Medicine

D-Index
83
Citations
34621
World Ranking
15404
National Ranking
228

Jens Huober 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 Jens Huober 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: 610 publications — 73rd percentile

73% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Jens Huober 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 Jens Huober 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: 83 D-Index — 24th percentile

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

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

Overview

Jens Huober is affiliated with Kantonsspital St. Gallen in Switzerland. Their research primarily focuses on oncology within the broader field of medicine, with a significant number of publications also contributing to biochemistry, genetics, and molecular biology.

Their main areas of study concentrate on cancer, particularly breast cancer, with a substantial emphasis on treatment studies and therapeutic approaches. Key research topics include:

  • Breast Cancer Treatment Studies
  • Advanced Breast Cancer Therapies
  • HER2/EGFR in Cancer Research
  • Cancer Treatment and Pharmacology
  • Cancer Immunotherapy and Biomarkers
  • Cancer Genomics and Diagnostics
  • Breast Lesions and Carcinomas

Jens Huober has contributed to numerous scientific articles in prominent journals. Frequent publication venues include:

  • Annals of Oncology
  • Cancer Research
  • Geburtshilfe und Frauenheilkunde
  • Senologie - Zeitschrift für Mammadiagnostik und -therapie
  • Clinical Cancer Research

Recent notable papers include:

  • Customizing local and systemic therapies for women with early breast cancer: the St. Gallen International Consensus Guidelines for treatment of early breast cancer 2021 (2021, Annals of Oncology)
  • Clinical and molecular characteristics of HER2-low-positive breast cancer: pooled analysis of individual patient data from four prospective, neoadjuvant clinical trials (2021, The Lancet Oncology)
  • Abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy for hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative, node-positive, high-risk early breast cancer (monarchE): results from a preplanned interim analysis of a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial (2022, The Lancet Oncology)
  • Adjuvant abemaciclib combined with endocrine therapy for high-risk early breast cancer: updated efficacy and Ki-67 analysis from the monarchE study (2021, Annals of Oncology)
  • Tumor mutational burden and immune infiltration as independent predictors of response to neoadjuvant immune checkpoint inhibition in early TNBC in GeparNuevo (2020, Annals of Oncology)

Collaborative work is an essential aspect of their research, featuring frequent co-authors such as:

  • Andreas Schneeweiß
  • Peter A. Fasching
  • Michael Untch
  • Sibylle Loibl
  • Jens-Uwe Blohmer

The subfields of study in which they have substantial contributions include:

  • Oncology
  • Cancer Research
  • Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine
  • Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging
  • Pathology and Forensic Medicine

Best Publications

  • Definition and Impact of Pathologic Complete Response on Prognosis After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Various Intrinsic Breast Cancer Subtypes

    Gunter von Minckwitz;Michael Untch;Jens-Uwe Blohmer;Serban D. Costa

  • Tumour-infiltrating lymphocytes and prognosis in different subtypes of breast cancer: a pooled analysis of 3771 patients treated with neoadjuvant therapy

    Carsten Denkert;Gunter von Minckwitz;Silvia Darb-Esfahani;Bianca Lederer

  • MONARCH 3: Abemaciclib As Initial Therapy for Advanced Breast Cancer

    Matthew P. Goetz;Masakazu Toi;Mario Campone;Joohyuk Sohn

  • De-escalating and escalating treatments for early-stage breast cancer: the St. Gallen International Expert Consensus Conference on the Primary Therapy of Early Breast Cancer 2017

    G. Curigliano;H. J. Burstein;E. P. Winer;M. Gnant

  • Neoadjuvant carboplatin in patients with triple-negative and HER2-positive early breast cancer (GeparSixto; GBG 66): a randomised phase 2 trial

    Gunter von Minckwitz;Andreas Schneeweiss;Sibylle Loibl;Christoph Salat

  • Addition of the PARP inhibitor veliparib plus carboplatin or carboplatin alone to standard neoadjuvant chemotherapy in triple-negative breast cancer (BrighTNess): a randomised, phase 3 trial

    Sibylle Loibl;Joyce O'Shaughnessy;Michael Untch;William M Sikov

  • Neoadjuvant Treatment With Trastuzumab in HER2-Positive Breast Cancer: Results From the GeparQuattro Study

    Michael Untch;Mahdi Rezai;Sibylle Loibl;Peter A. Fasching

  • A randomised phase II study investigating durvalumab in addition to an anthracycline taxane-based neoadjuvant therapy in early triple-negative breast cancer: clinical results and biomarker analysis of GeparNuevo study

    S. Loibl;M. Untch;N. Burchardi;J. Huober

  • Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy and Bevacizumab for HER2-Negative Breast Cancer

    Gunter von Minckwitz;Holger Eidtmann;Mahdi Rezai;Peter A. Fasching

  • Detection and HER2 Expression of Circulating Tumor Cells: Prospective Monitoring in Breast Cancer Patients Treated in the Neoadjuvant GeparQuattro Trial

    Sabine Riethdorf;Volkmar Müller;Liling Zhang;Thomas Rau

  • Customizing local and systemic therapies for women with early breast cancer: the St. Gallen International Consensus Guidelines for treatment of early breast cancer 2021.

    H J Burstein;G Curigliano;B Thürlimann;W P Weber

  • Surgery in Recurrent Ovarian Cancer: The Arbeitsgemeinschaft Gynaekologische Onkologie (AGO) DESKTOP OVAR Trial

    Philipp Harter;Andreas du Bois;Maik Hahmann;Annette Hasenburg

  • Lapatinib versus trastuzumab in combination with neoadjuvant anthracycline-taxane-based chemotherapy (GeparQuinto, GBG 44): a randomised phase 3 trial

    Michael Untch;Sibylle Loibl;Joachim Bischoff;Holger Eidtmann

  • Trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) versus lapatinib plus capecitabine in patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer and central nervous system metastases: a retrospective, exploratory analysis in EMILIA

    I.E. Krop;N.U. Lin;K. Blackwell;E. Guardino

  • Response-Guided Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy for Breast Cancer

    Gunter von Minckwitz;Jens Uwe Blohmer;Serban Dan Costa;Carsten Denkert

  • Abemaciclib Combined With Endocrine Therapy for the Adjuvant Treatment of HR+, HER2−, Node-Positive, High-Risk, Early Breast Cancer (monarchE)

    Stephen R D Johnston;Nadia Harbeck;Roberto Hegg;Masakazu Toi

  • Germline Mutation Status, Pathological Complete Response, and Disease-Free Survival in Triple-Negative Breast Cancer: Secondary Analysis of the GeparSixto Randomized Clinical Trial.

    Eric Hahnen;Bianca Lederer;Jan Hauke;Sibylle Loibl

  • Clinical and molecular characteristics of HER2-low-positive breast cancer: pooled analysis of individual patient data from four prospective, neoadjuvant clinical trials.

    Carsten Denkert;Fenja Seither;Andreas Schneeweiss;Theresa Link

  • Effect of neoadjuvant anthracycline–taxane-based chemotherapy in different biological breast cancer phenotypes: overall results from the GeparTrio study

    Jens Huober;Gunter von Minckwitz;Carsten Denkert;Hans Tesch

  • Correction to: De-escalating and escalating treatments for early-stage breast cancer: the St. Gallen International Expert Consensus Conference on the Primary Therapy of Early Breast Cancer 2017 (Annals of Oncology (2017) 28(8) (1700–1712), (S0923753419321817), (10.1093/annonc/mdx308))

    G. Curigliano;H. J. Burstein;E. P. Winer;M. Gnant

Frequent Co-Authors

Andreas Schneeweiss
Andreas Schneeweiss German Cancer Research Center
Michael Untch
Michael Untch Helios Klinikum Berlin-Buch
Peter A. Fasching
Peter A. Fasching University of Erlangen-Nuremberg
Sibylle Loibl
Sibylle Loibl Goethe University Frankfurt
Christian Jackisch
Christian Jackisch Breast Cancer Research Foundation
Gunter von Minckwitz
Gunter von Minckwitz University of Ulm
Carsten Denkert
Carsten Denkert Philipp University of Marburg
Volkmar Müller
Volkmar Müller Universität Hamburg
Tanja Fehm
Tanja Fehm Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf
Nadia Harbeck
Nadia Harbeck Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München

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 a medical career in the USA doesn’t always have to begin with a traditional MD. Many students choose alternative online pathways that offer flexible schedules and faster progression. A popular choice for registered nurses wanting to advance is enrolling in online rn-bsn programs without clinicals. These programs allow working professionals to complete their degrees without hands-on clinical requirements, making them ideal for busy practitioners.

For those looking to take their nursing education even further, there are also dnp programs online. Some universities offer online dnp programs without clinicals, removing clinical hurdles while still providing a pathway to advanced leadership roles in nursing.

If you’re just beginning your healthcare journey, consider fast-tracking your entry into nursing with a fast lpn program online. These accelerated options quickly prepare students for licensure and employment, offering a flexible alternative to traditional classroom-based education.

Whether you’re upskilling or just starting out, these online pathways make it easier than ever to pursue a rewarding healthcare career in the US.

Best Scientists Citing Jens Huober

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles