World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Medicine

D-Index
84
Citations
28427
World Ranking
15009
National Ranking
7588

Philip L. McCarthy 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 Philip L. McCarthy 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: 545 publications — 65th percentile

65% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Philip L. McCarthy 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 Philip L. McCarthy 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: 84 D-Index — 27th percentile

27% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Philip L. McCarthy is affiliated with Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center in the United States. Their academic contributions focus primarily within the field of medicine, with notable specialization in hematology, oncology, and immunology. They have also contributed to molecular biology and genetics research.

Their research topics include:

  • Multiple Myeloma Research and Treatments
  • CAR-T cell therapy research
  • Protein Degradation and Inhibitors
  • Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation
  • Immunotherapy and Immune Responses
  • Acute Myeloid Leukemia Research
  • Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia Research

McCarthy has published extensively, with a significant number of papers appearing in prominent journals such as Blood, Transplantation and Cellular Therapy, and the Journal of Clinical Oncology. Other frequently appearing publication venues include the Biology of Blood and Marrow Transplantation and Blood Advances.

Examples of recent scholarly papers include:

  • Triplet Therapy, Transplantation, and Maintenance until Progression in Myeloma (2022, New England Journal of Medicine)
  • Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) clinical practice guideline on immune effector cell-related adverse events (2020, Journal for ImmunoTherapy of Cancer)
  • Autologous T cell therapy for MAGE-A4+ solid cancers in HLA-A*02+ patients: a phase 1 trial (2023, Nature Medicine)
  • Developments in continuous therapy and maintenance treatment approaches for patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (2020, Blood Cancer Journal)
  • β2-adrenergic receptor signaling regulates metabolic pathways critical to myeloid-derived suppressor cell function within the TME (2021, Cell Reports)

Frequent collaborators in McCarthy's work include Marcelo C. Pasquini, Theresa Hahn, Yvonne A. Efebera, Hemn Mohammadpour, and Jens Hillengaß. These collaborations have contributed to a multidisciplinary approach covering clinical and translational research in oncology and hematology.

Best Publications

  • International Myeloma Working Group consensus criteria for response and minimal residual disease assessment in multiple myeloma

    Shaji Kumar;Bruno Paiva;Kenneth C. Anderson;Brian Durie

  • Lenalidomide after stem-cell transplantation for multiple myeloma

    Philip L. McCarthy;Kouros Owzar;Craig C. Hofmeister;David D. Hurd

  • Cotransplantation of HLA-identical sibling culture-expanded mesenchymal stem cells and hematopoietic stem cells in hematologic malignancy patients

    Hillard M. Lazarus;Omer N. Koc;Steven M. Devine;Peter Curtin

  • A decision analysis of allogeneic bone marrow transplantation for the myelodysplastic syndromes: delayed transplantation for low-risk myelodysplasia is associated with improved outcome

    Corey S. Cutler;Stephanie J. Lee;Peter Greenberg;H. Joachim Deeg

  • Risk factors for acute GVHD and survival after hematopoietic cell transplantation.

    Madan Jagasia;Mukta Arora;Mary E D Flowers;Nelson J. Chao

  • Geriatric assessment predicts survival and toxicities in elderly myeloma patients: an International Myeloma Working Group report

    Antonio Palumbo;Sara Bringhen;Maria Victoria Mateos;Alessandra Larocca

  • Lenalidomide Maintenance After Autologous Stem-Cell Transplantation in Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma: A Meta-Analysis.

    Philip L. McCarthy;Sarah A. Holstein;Maria Teresa Petrucci;Paul G. Richardson

  • Severity of chronic graft-versus-host disease: association with treatment-related mortality and relapse

    Stephanie J. Lee;John P. Klein;A. John Barrett;Olle Ringden

  • Increasing Incidence of Chronic Graft-versus-Host Disease in Allogeneic Transplantation: A Report from the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research

    Sally Arai;Mukta Arora;Tao Wang;Tao Wang;Stephen R. Spellman

  • High-dose chemotherapy with autologous hematopoietic stem-cell support for breast cancer in North America.

    K. H. Antman;P. A. Rowlings;W. P. Vaughan;C. J. Pelz

  • Allogeneic bone marrow transplantation for low-grade lymphoma.

    Koen Van Besien;Kathleen A. Sobocinski;Philip A. Rowlings;Sandra C. Murphy

  • OUTCOME OF TRANSPLANTATION FOR MYELOFIBROSIS

    Karen K. Ballen;Smriti Shrestha;Kathleen A. Sobocinski;Mei Jie Zhang

  • Second primary malignancies with lenalidomide therapy for newly diagnosed myeloma: a meta-analysis of individual patient data

    Antonio Palumbo;Sara Bringhen;Shaji K Kumar;Giulia Lupparelli

  • Significant Improvement in Survival After Allogeneic Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation During a Period of Significantly Increased Use, Older Recipient Age, and Use of Unrelated Donors

    Theresa Hahn;Philip L. McCarthy;Anna Hassebroek;Christopher Bredeson

  • Similar outcomes using myeloablative vs reduced-intensity allogeneic transplant preparative regimens for AML or MDS.

    Selina M. Luger;Olle Ringdén;Mei-Jie Zhang;Waleska S. Pérez

  • New Drugs and Novel Mechanisms of Action in Multiple Myeloma in 2013: A Report From the International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG)

    E. M. Ocio;P. G. Richardson;S. V. Rajkumar;A. Palumbo

  • Effect of up-front daclizumab when combined with steroids for the treatment of acute graft-versus-host disease: results of a randomized trial

    Stephanie J. Lee;David Zahrieh;Edward Agura;Margaret L. MacMillan

  • Autologous Transplantation for Diffuse Aggressive Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma in Patients Never Achieving Remission: A Report from the Autologous Blood and Marrow Transplant Registry

    J. M. Vose;M. J. Zhang;P. A. Rowlings;H. M. Lazarus

  • IMWG consensus on maintenance therapy in multiple myeloma

    Heinz Ludwig;Brian G.M. Durie;Philip L McCarthy;Antonio Palumbo

  • Bone marrow transplants from HLA-identical siblings in advanced Hodgkin's disease.

    J. L. Gajewski;G. L. Phillips;K. A. Sobocinski;J. O. Armitage

Frequent Co-Authors

Mary M. Horowitz
Mary M. Horowitz Medical College of Wisconsin
Paul G. Richardson
Paul G. Richardson Harvard University
Robert Peter Gale
Robert Peter Gale Imperial College London
Marcelo C. Pasquini
Marcelo C. Pasquini Medical College of Wisconsin
Stephen R. Spellman
Stephen R. Spellman Medical College of Wisconsin
Daniel O. Stram
Daniel O. Stram University of Southern California
Christopher A. Haiman
Christopher A. Haiman University of Southern California
David Van Den Berg
David Van Den Berg University of Southern California
Daniel J. Weisdorf
Daniel J. Weisdorf University of Minnesota
Heinz G. Remold
Heinz G. Remold Brigham and Women's Hospital

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

For those interested in alternative or advanced pathways related to medicine and healthcare, a variety of flexible online options exist. Many working professionals are pursuing degrees that offer greater convenience and accelerated timelines, without sacrificing quality.

Nursing remains one of the most popular tracks. One appealing choice is an rn to bsn online with no clinicals program, designed for registered nurses seeking career advancement without additional in-person clinical hours. For LPNs looking to quickly advance, accelerated lpn programs online can offer a fast-track to further credentialing.

Those aiming for leadership roles might explore graduate programs such as accelerated msn to dnp programs, which are structured to let nurses earn the highest clinical qualification in a shorter time. Even more, professionals can consider online dnp programs that emphasize flexibility for busy schedules.

Online medical and nursing degrees are increasingly accessible, stackable, and tailored to match a variety of career aspirations. Carefully comparing program duration, format, and clinical requirements can help you find the best fit for your goals.

Best Scientists Citing Philip L. McCarthy

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles