World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!
Markus Loeffler

Markus Loeffler

D-Index & Metrics

Medicine

D-Index
115
Citations
60106
World Ranking
4473
National Ranking
244

Markus Loeffler 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 Markus Loeffler 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: 567 publications — 68th percentile

68% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Markus Loeffler 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 Markus Loeffler 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: 115 D-Index — 78th percentile

78% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Markus Loeffler is affiliated with Leipzig University in Germany. Their research primarily spans the fields of Medicine and Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology. Within these fields, Loeffler has contributed extensively to subfields such as Genetics, Molecular Biology, Pathology and Forensic Medicine, Epidemiology, and Oncology.

Their work encompasses several main research topics, including Genetic Associations and Epidemiology, Genetic factors in colorectal cancer, Lymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment, Bioinformatics and Genomic Networks, Cancer Genomics and Diagnostics, Colorectal Cancer Screening and Detection, and Atherosclerosis and Cardiovascular Diseases.

Loeffler's published papers cover a variety of significant studies. Notable recent papers include:

  • Large-scale cis- and trans-eQTL analyses identify thousands of genetic loci and polygenic scores that regulate blood gene expression, 2021, Nature Genetics
  • Identification of 371 genetic variants for age at first sex and birth linked to externalising behaviour, 2021, Nature Human Behaviour
  • Framework and baseline examination of the German National Cohort (NAKO), 2022, European Journal of Epidemiology
  • Theranostic AGuIX nanoparticles as radiosensitizer: A phase I, dose-escalation study in patients with multiple brain metastases (NANO-RAD trial), 2021, Radiotherapy and Oncology
  • Genetic correlations and genome-wide associations of cortical structure in general population samples of 22,824 adults, 2020, Nature Communications

Frequent co-authors collaborating with Loeffler throughout their career include Markus Scholz, Christoph Engel, Kerstin Wirkner, Holger Kirsten, and Arno Villringer.

Their research has been published repeatedly in a selection of academic venues, reflecting an active engagement with multiple journals. These venues include:

  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)
  • PLoS ONE
  • Bundesgesundheitsblatt - Gesundheitsforschung - Gesundheitsschutz
  • Nature Communications
  • Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)

Best Publications

  • Intensive insulin therapy and pentastarch resuscitation in severe sepsis.

    Frank M. Brunkhorst;Christoph Engel;Frank Bloos;Andreas Meier-Hellmann

  • CHOP-like chemotherapy plus rituximab versus CHOP-like chemotherapy alone in young patients with good-prognosis diffuse large-B-cell lymphoma: a randomised controlled trial by the MabThera International Trial (MInT) Group

    Michael Pfreundschuh;Lorenz Trümper;Anders Österborg;Ruth Pettengell

  • Stem cells: attributes, cycles, spirals, pitfalls and uncertainties. Lessons for and from the crypt.

    Christopher S Potten;M Loeffler

  • Large-scale cis- and trans-eQTL analyses identify thousands of genetic loci and polygenic scores that regulate blood gene expression

    Urmo Võsa;Annique Claringbould;Annique Claringbould;Harm-Jan Westra;Marc Jan Bonder

  • Molecular subtypes of diffuse large B cell lymphoma are associated with distinct pathogenic mechanisms and outcomes

    Bjoern Chapuy;Chip Stewart;Andrew J Dunford;Jaegil Kim

  • Six versus eight cycles of bi-weekly CHOP-14 with or without rituximab in elderly patients with aggressive CD20+ B-cell lymphomas: a randomised controlled trial (RICOVER-60)

    Michael Pfreundschuh;Joerg Schubert;Marita Ziepert;Rudolf Schmits

  • A Biologic Definition of Burkitt's Lymphoma from Transcriptional and Genomic Profiling

    Michael Hummel;Stefan Bentink;Hilmar Berger;Wolfram Klapper

  • Standard and Increased-Dose BEACOPP Chemotherapy Compared with COPP-ABVD for Advanced Hodgkin's Disease

    Volker Diehl;Jeremy Franklin;Michael Pfreundschuh;Bernd Lathan

  • Epidemiology of sepsis in Germany: results from a national prospective multicenter study

    Christoph Engel;Frank M. Brunkhorst;Hans-Georg Bone;Reinhard Brunkhorst

  • Patients with IDH1 wild type anaplastic astrocytomas exhibit worse prognosis than IDH1-mutated glioblastomas, and IDH1 mutation status accounts for the unfavorable prognostic effect of higher age: Implications for classification of gliomas

    Christian Hartmann;Christian Hartmann;Bettina Hentschel;Wolfgang Wick;Wolfgang Wick;David Capper

  • CHOP-like chemotherapy with or without rituximab in young patients with good-prognosis diffuse large-B-cell lymphoma: 6-year results of an open-label randomised study of the MabThera International Trial (MInT) Group.

    Michael Pfreundschuh;Evelyn Kuhnt;Lorenz Trümper;Anders Österborg

  • Two-weekly or 3-weekly CHOP chemotherapy with or without etoposide for the treatment of elderly patients with aggressive lymphomas: results of the NHL-B2 trial of the DSHNHL

    Michael Pfreundschuh;Lorenz Trümper;Marita Kloess;Rudolf Schmits

  • Genome-wide association analyses of risk tolerance and risky behaviors in over 1 million individuals identify hundreds of loci and shared genetic influences

    Richard Karlsson Linnér;Richard Karlsson Linnér;Pietro Biroli;Edward Kong;S. Fleur W. Meddens;S. Fleur W. Meddens

  • Targeting tumor-associated fibroblasts improves cancer chemotherapy by increasing intratumoral drug uptake

    Markus Loeffler;Jörg A. Krüger;Andreas G. Niethammer;Ralph A. Reisfeld

  • Molecular Predictors of Progression-Free and Overall Survival in Patients With Newly Diagnosed Glioblastoma: A Prospective Translational Study of the German Glioma Network

    Michael Weller;Jörg Felsberg;Christian Hartmann;Hilmar Berger

  • Standard International Prognostic Index Remains a Valid Predictor of Outcome for Patients With Aggressive CD20+ B-Cell Lymphoma in the Rituximab Era

    Marita Ziepert;Dirk Hasenclever;Evelyn Kuhnt;Bertram Glass

  • Treatment and prognosis of mature T-cell and NK-cell lymphoma: an analysis of patients with T-cell lymphoma treated in studies of the German High-Grade Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma Study Group.

    Norbert Schmitz;Lorenz Trümper;Marita Ziepert;Maike Nickelsen

  • Two-weekly or 3-weekly CHOP chemotherapy with or without etoposide for the treatment of young patients with good-prognosis (normal LDH) aggressive lymphomas: results of the NHL-B1 trial of the DSHNHL.

    Michael Pfreundschuh;Lorenz Trümper;Marita Kloess;Rudolf Schmits

  • MYC status in concert with BCL2 and BCL6 expression predicts outcome in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma

    Heike Horn;Marita Ziepert;Claudia Becher;Thomas F. E. Barth

  • NAD(P)H Oxidase and Multidrug Resistance Protein Genetic Polymorphisms Are Associated With Doxorubicin-Induced Cardiotoxicity

    Leszek Wojnowski;Bettina Kulle;Markus Schirmer;Gregor Schlüter

Frequent Co-Authors

Christoph Engel
Christoph Engel Leipzig University
Michael Pfreundschuh
Michael Pfreundschuh Saarland University
Arno Villringer
Arno Villringer Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences
Lorenz Trümper
Lorenz Trümper University of Göttingen
Norbert Schmitz
Norbert Schmitz University of Münster
Joachim Thiery
Joachim Thiery Leipzig University
Andreas Rosenwald
Andreas Rosenwald University of Würzburg
A. Veronica Witte
A. Veronica Witte Max Planck Society
Wolfram Klapper
Wolfram Klapper Kiel University
Reiner Siebert
Reiner Siebert University of Ulm

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 career in medicine doesn’t always mean spending years in traditional classrooms. Today, there are a variety of online degrees and educational pathways available for aspiring healthcare professionals. These flexible options make it easier to balance studies with work or family responsibilities, and they are especially beneficial for those looking for affordable or accelerated programs.

For nurses ready to advance their practice, the most affordable dnp programs offer a convenient and cost-effective way to earn a Doctor of Nursing Practice degree online. Similarly, prospective pharmacists can consider accredited online pharmacy school programs that provide flexibility without compromising educational quality.

If your interests lean toward healthcare administration or data, a health information management bachelor degree online can open opportunities in hospitals, research centers, and insurance companies. Those looking for a quick entry into the healthcare workforce may explore how much is medical billing and coding school to start a career in medical billing and coding—a vital and growing field.

Best Scientists Citing Markus Loeffler

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles