World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Medicine

D-Index
116
Citations
57215
World Ranking
4311
National Ranking
425

Nicholas C.P. Cross 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 Nicholas C.P. Cross 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: 575 publications — 69th percentile

69% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Nicholas C.P. Cross 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 Nicholas C.P. Cross 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: 116 D-Index — 79th percentile

79% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Nicholas C.P. Cross is an academic affiliated with the University of Southampton in the United Kingdom. Their research primarily focuses on the field of Medicine, with particular expertise in Hematology, Genetics, Rheumatology, Molecular Biology, and Immunology.

Their main research topics include:

  • Myeloproliferative Neoplasms: Diagnosis and Treatment
  • Chronic Myeloid Leukemia Treatments
  • Acute Myeloid Leukemia Research
  • Eosinophilic Disorders and Syndromes
  • Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia Research
  • Mast cells and histamine
  • Cancer Genomics and Diagnostics

Regarding their recent publications, these include:

  • "The 5th edition of the World Health Organization Classification of Haematolymphoid Tumours: Myeloid and Histiocytic/Dendritic Neoplasms," 2022, published in Leukemia
  • "Clonal myelopoiesis in the UK Biobank cohort: ASXL1 mutations are strongly associated with smoking," 2020, published in Leukemia
  • "European LeukemiaNet laboratory recommendations for the diagnosis and management of chronic myeloid leukemia," 2023, published in Leukemia
  • "HUGO Gene Nomenclature Committee (HGNC) recommendations for the designation of gene fusions," 2021, published in Leukemia
  • "Clonal myelopoiesis promotes adverse outcomes in chronic kidney disease," 2021, published in Leukemia

Throughout their career, Nicholas C.P. Cross has co-authored multiple scientific papers with frequent collaborators including:

  • Andreas Reiter
  • Andreas Hochhaus
  • Nicole Naumann
  • Alice Fabarius
  • Georgia Metzgeroth

Their work has been published extensively in several scientific journals, with notable publication counts in:

  • Leukemia (17 articles)
  • Blood (11 articles)
  • British Journal of Haematology (7 articles)
  • Clinical Lymphoma Myeloma & Leukemia (4 articles)
  • Blood Advances (3 articles)

The research of Nicholas C.P. Cross contributes to understanding hematological malignancies, with frequent emphasis on leukemia and other blood disorders, as illustrated by their selection of research venues and topics.

Best Publications

  • A Tyrosine Kinase Created by Fusion of the PDGFRA and FIP1L1 Genes as a Therapeutic Target of Imatinib in Idiopathic Hypereosinophilic Syndrome

    Jan Cools;Jan Cools;Daniel J. DeAngelo;Jason Gotlib;Elizabeth H. Stover

  • Somatic CALR Mutations in Myeloproliferative Neoplasms with Nonmutated JAK2

    J. Nangalia;C.E. Massie;E.J. Baxter;F.L. Nice

  • Clinical and biological implications of driver mutations in myelodysplastic syndromes.

    Elli Papaemmanuil;Moritz Gerstung;Luca Malcovati;Sudhir Tauro

  • Somatic SF3B1 Mutation in Myelodysplasia with Ring Sideroblasts

    E. Papaemmanuil;M. Cazzola;J. Boultwood;L. Malcovati

  • Inactivating mutations of the histone methyltransferase gene EZH2 in myeloid disorders

    Thomas Ernst;Andrew J Chase;Andrew J Chase;Joannah Score;Joannah Score;Claire E Hidalgo-Curtis;Claire E Hidalgo-Curtis

  • Molecular and chromosomal mechanisms of resistance to imatinib (STI571) therapy.

    A. Hochhaus;S. Kreil;A. S. Corbin;P. La Rosée;P. La Rosée

  • Widespread occurrence of the JAK2 V617F mutation in chronic myeloproliferative disorders

    Amy V. Jones;Sebastian Kreil;Katerina Zoi;Katherine Waghorn

  • Monitoring CML patients responding to treatment with tyrosine kinase inhibitors: review and recommendations for harmonizing current methodology for detecting BCR-ABL transcripts and kinase domain mutations and for expressing results

    Timothy P Hughes;Michael W Deininger;Andreas Hochhaus;Susan Branford

  • Response to imatinib mesylate in patients with chronic myeloproliferative diseases with rearrangements of the platelet-derived growth factor receptor beta.

    Jane F. Apperley;Martine Gardembas;Junia V. Melo;Robin Russell-Jones

  • Aberrations of EZH2 in cancer

    Andrew Chase;Nicholas C.P. Cross

  • Prognostic Score Including Gene Mutations in Chronic Myelomonocytic Leukemia

    Raphaël Itzykson;Olivier Kosmider;Aline Renneville;Véronique Gelsi-Boyer

  • Desirable performance characteristics for BCR-ABL measurement on an international reporting scale to allow consistent interpretation of individual patient response and comparison of response rates between clinical trials

    Susan Branford;Linda Fletcher;Nicholas C.P. Cross;Martin C. Müller

  • Bcr-Abl kinase domain mutation analysis in chronic myeloid leukemia patients treated with tyrosine kinase inhibitors: recommendations from an expert panel on behalf of European LeukemiaNet

    Simona Soverini;Andreas Hochhaus;Franck E. Nicolini;Franz Gruber

  • JAK2 haplotype is a major risk factor for the development of myeloproliferative neoplasms.

    Amy V Jones;Andrew Chase;Richard T Silver;David Oscier

  • Standardized definitions of molecular response in chronic myeloid leukemia

    N C P Cross;H E White;M C Müller;G Saglio

  • Competitive polymerase chain reaction to estimate the number of BCR-ABL transcripts in chronic myeloid leukemia patients after bone marrow transplantation

    Nicholas C.P. Cross;Lin Feng;Andrew Chase;Julie Bungey

  • Frequent CBL mutations associated with 11q acquired uniparental disomy in myeloproliferative neoplasms.

    Francis H. Grand;Claire E. Hidalgo-Curtis;Thomas Ernst;Katerina Zoi

  • CHIC2 deletion, a surrogate for FIP1L1-PDGFRA fusion, occurs in systemic mastocytosis associated with eosinophilia and predicts response to imatinib mesylate therapy

    Animesh Pardanani;Animesh Pardanani;Animesh Pardanani;Rhett P. Ketterling;Rhett P. Ketterling;Rhett P. Ketterling;Stephanie R. Brockman;Stephanie R. Brockman;Stephanie R. Brockman;Heather C. Flynn;Heather C. Flynn;Heather C. Flynn

  • Relapse of chronic myeloid leukemia after allogeneic bone marrow transplant: the case for giving donor leukocyte transfusions before the onset of hematologic relapse

    F. Van Rhee;Feng Lin;J. O. Cullis;A. Spencer

  • Accurate and rapid analysis of residual disease in patients with CML using specific fluorescent hybridization probes for real time quantitative RT-PCR.

    M. Emig;S. Saussele;H. Wittor;A. Weisser

Frequent Co-Authors

Andreas Reiter
Andreas Reiter Heidelberg University
Andreas Hochhaus
Andreas Hochhaus Friedrich Schiller University Jena
John M. Goldman
John M. Goldman Imperial College London
Torsten Haferlach
Torsten Haferlach MLL Munich Leukemia Laboratory
Richard T. Silver
Richard T. Silver Cornell University
Susanne Schnittger
Susanne Schnittger Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München
Claudia Haferlach
Claudia Haferlach Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München
Peter Valent
Peter Valent Medical University of Vienna
Giuseppe Saglio
Giuseppe Saglio University of Turin
Peter J. Campbell
Peter J. Campbell Wellcome Sanger Institute

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 related healthcare degrees can open new doors for those interested in medical careers, without the traditional medical school route. Many students consider nursing as a rewarding and flexible pathway. If you already hold a non-nursing degree, online direct entry MSN programs for non-nurses let you transition quickly into advanced nursing roles, leveraging your previous education.

For prospective nurses concerned about admissions, reviewing nursing schools with high acceptance rates can help you find accessible options and reduce the stress of competitive entry requirements. Additionally, some programs provide a more streamlined process—explore a nursing school without teas test to waive standardized entrance exams entirely.

If direct patient care isn’t your preferred route, consider the administrative side of healthcare. Accredited online medical billing and coding programs prepare you for in-demand roles with flexible career options. Check out the best medical billing and coding schools online for recognized training and financial aid opportunities.

These pathways help you find the right fit in healthcare, whether at the bedside, behind the scenes, or advancing your role through further education.

Best Scientists Citing Nicholas C.P. Cross

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles