World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Medicine

D-Index
132
Citations
81287
World Ranking
2283
National Ranking
1289

Scott J. Rodig 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 Scott J. Rodig 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: 577 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.

Scott J. Rodig 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 Scott J. Rodig 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: 132 D-Index — 89th percentile

89% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Scott J. Rodig is affiliated with Harvard University in the United States. Their research primarily spans the fields of Medicine and Biochemistry, Genetics, and Molecular Biology, with a specific focus on oncology and related biomedical disciplines.

The scientist has a substantial publication record in oncology, with notable subfields of study including Oncology, Molecular Biology, Immunology, Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine, and Cancer Research.

Main topics of their work reflect these interests and include:

  • Cancer Immunotherapy and Biomarkers
  • Cancer Genomics and Diagnostics
  • CAR-T cell therapy research
  • Single-cell and spatial transcriptomics
  • Lung Cancer Treatments and Mutations
  • Immune Cell Function and Interaction
  • Immunotherapy and Immune Responses

Scott J. Rodig's frequent co-authors are Kathleen L. Pfaff, Mark M. Awad, Joao V. Alessi, Jason L. Weirather, and Biagio Ricciuti, reflecting collaborative work within these research domains.

Their recent papers include the following:

  • "Personal neoantigen vaccines induce persistent memory T cell responses and epitope spreading in patients with melanoma," 2021, Nature Medicine
  • "Expansion sequencing: Spatially precise in situ transcriptomics in intact biological systems," 2021, Science
  • "Association of High Tumor Mutation Burden in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancers With Increased Immune Infiltration and Improved Clinical Outcomes of PD-L1 Blockade Across PD-L1 Expression Levels," 2022, JAMA Oncology
  • "Immunogenomic profiling determines responses to combined PARP and PD-1 inhibition in ovarian cancer," 2020, Nature Communications
  • "Axicabtagene Ciloleucel in the Non-Trial Setting: Outcomes and Correlates of Response, Resistance, and Toxicity," 2020, Journal of Clinical Oncology

The scientist has published extensively in multiple venues, with the most frequent being:

  • Journal of Clinical Oncology
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)
  • Cancer Research
  • Blood
  • Cold Spring Harbor Protocols

Scott J. Rodig's research contributions focus on the molecular and immunological underpinnings of cancer, including therapeutic approaches such as CAR-T cell therapy and immune checkpoint blockade. Their work integrates clinical insights with molecular genomics and spatial transcriptomics techniques.

Best Publications

  • PD-1 Blockade with Nivolumab in Relapsed or Refractory Hodgkin's Lymphoma

    Stephen M. Ansell;Alexander M. Lesokhin;Alexander M. Lesokhin;Ivan Borrello;Ahmad Halwani

  • An immunogenic personal neoantigen vaccine for patients with melanoma

    Patrick A. Ott;Zhuting Hu;Derin B. Keskin;Derin B. Keskin;Sachet A. Shukla;Sachet A. Shukla

  • Clinical Features and Outcome of Patients With Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer Who Harbor EML4-ALK

    Alice T. Shaw;Beow Y. Yeap;Mari Mino-Kenudson;Subba R. Digumarthy

  • Targeted disruption of the Stat1 gene in mice reveals unexpected physiologic specificity in the JAK-STAT signaling pathway

    Marco A Meraz;Marco A Meraz;J.Michael White;Kathleen C.F Sheehan;Erika A Bach

  • Comprehensive analyses of tumor immunity: implications for cancer immunotherapy

    Bo Li;Eric Severson;Eric Severson;Jean Christophe Pignon;Haoquan Zhao

  • Subsets of exhausted CD8+ T cells differentially mediate tumor control and respond to checkpoint blockade.

    Brian C. Miller;Debattama R. Sen;Debattama R. Sen;Rose Al Abosy;Rose Al Abosy;Kevin Bi;Kevin Bi

  • 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

  • Adaptive immunity maintains occult cancer in an equilibrium state

    Catherine M. Koebel;William Vermi;William Vermi;Jeremy B. Swann;Jeremy B. Swann;Nadeen Zerafa

  • Adaptive resistance to therapeutic PD-1 blockade is associated with upregulation of alternative immune checkpoints.

    Shohei Koyama;Esra A. Akbay;Yvonne Y. Li;Grit S. Herter-Sprie

  • Integrative analysis reveals selective 9p24.1 amplification, increased PD-1 ligand expression, and further induction via JAK2 in nodular sclerosing Hodgkin lymphoma and primary mediastinal large B-cell lymphoma

    Michael R. Green;Stefano Monti;Scott J. Rodig;Przemyslaw Juszczynski

  • MYD88 L265P Somatic Mutation in Waldenström's Macroglobulinemia

    Steven P. Treon;Lian Xu;Guang Yang;Yangsheng Zhou

  • Neoantigen vaccine generates intratumoral T cell responses in phase Ib glioblastoma trial

    Derin B. Keskin;Annabelle J. Anandappa;Jing Sun;Itay Tirosh

  • Activation of the PD-1 pathway contributes to immune escape in EGFR-driven lung tumors

    Esra A. Akbay;Esra A. Akbay;Shohei Koyama;Julian Carretero;Abigail Altabef;Abigail Altabef

  • Nivolumab in patients with relapsed or refractory hematologic malignancy: Preliminary results of a phase ib study

    Alexander M. Lesokhin;Alexander M. Lesokhin;Stephen M. Ansell;Philippe Armand;Emma C. Scott

  • Disruption of the Jak1 Gene Demonstrates Obligatory and Nonredundant Roles of the Jaks in Cytokine-Induced Biologic Responses

    Scott J Rodig;Marco A Meraz;J.Michael White;Pat A Lampe

  • Nivolumab for classical Hodgkin's lymphoma after failure of both autologous stem-cell transplantation and brentuximab vedotin: a multicentre, multicohort, single-arm phase 2 trial

    Anas Younes;Armando Santoro;Margaret Shipp;Pier Luigi Zinzani

  • Ibrutinib in Previously Treated Waldenström’s Macroglobulinemia

    Steven P. Treon;Christina K. Tripsas;Kirsten Meid;Diane Warren

  • Crizotinib in ALK-rearranged inflammatory myofibroblastic tumor.

    James E. Butrynski;David R. D’Adamo;Jason L. Hornick;Paola Dal Cin

  • PD-L1 EXPRESSION IS CHARACTERISTIC OF A SUBSET OF AGGRESSIVE B-CELL LYMPHOMAS AND VIRUS-ASSOCIATED MALIGNANCIES

    Benjamin J. Chen;Bjoern Chapuy;Jing Ouyang;Heather H. Sun

  • Tet1 and Tet2 Regulate 5-Hydroxymethylcytosine Production and Cell Lineage Specification in Mouse Embryonic Stem Cells

    Kian Peng Koh;Akiko Yabuuchi;Sridhar Rao;Yun Huang

Frequent Co-Authors

Margaret A. Shipp
Margaret A. Shipp Harvard University
Donna Neuberg
Donna Neuberg Harvard University
Philippe Armand
Philippe Armand Harvard University
Gordon J. Freeman
Gordon J. Freeman Harvard University
F. Stephen Hodi
F. Stephen Hodi Harvard University
Jeffery L. Kutok
Jeffery L. Kutok Epizyme (United States)
Gad Getz
Gad Getz Broad Institute
Geoffrey I. Shapiro
Geoffrey I. Shapiro Harvard University
Andrew L. Kung
Andrew L. Kung Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center
Catherine J. Wu
Catherine J. Wu Harvard University

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

Pursuing Medicine in the USA can open doors to a variety of related degrees and health career options—many of which can now be accessed through flexible online programs. Students interested in improving community health and wellness might consider exploring the best online nutrition programs for specialized study in nutritional science, dietetics, or food policy.

For those drawn to healthcare leadership or administration, knowing how to evaluate programs is essential. Understanding how to evaluate healthcare administration degree programs helps ensure your chosen path meets accredited standards, which can be crucial for career advancement.

Nursing professionals who wish to advance without the challenge of additional clinical hours may wish to consider the best online rn to bsn programs without clinical requirements. These programs are ideal for working nurses balancing education and employment.

For advanced practice nurses looking to quickly move into leadership or clinical specialist roles, the fastest online dnp programs allow for an expedited path to the highest level of nursing education.

Best Scientists Citing Scott J. Rodig

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles