World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!
Vanna Chiarion-Sileni

Vanna Chiarion-Sileni

D-Index & Metrics

Medicine

D-Index
73
Citations
57496
World Ranking
19520
National Ranking
789

Vanna Chiarion-Sileni 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 Vanna Chiarion-Sileni 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: 270 publications — 11th percentile

11% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Vanna Chiarion-Sileni 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 Vanna Chiarion-Sileni 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: 73 D-Index — 3rd percentile

3% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Vanna Chiarion-Sileni is affiliated with the European Institute of Oncology in Italy. Their research primarily spans the fields of Medicine and Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology, with significant contributions to Oncology, Molecular Biology, Immunology, Organic Chemistry, and Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine.

The scientist's work focuses extensively on topics related to cancer and immunotherapy. These include:

  • Cancer Immunotherapy and Biomarkers
  • Melanoma and MAPK Pathways
  • CAR-T cell therapy research
  • Cutaneous Melanoma Detection and Management
  • Immunotherapy and Immune Responses
  • Click Chemistry and Applications
  • Brain Metastases and Treatment

Vanna Chiarion-Sileni has published multiple papers in internationally recognized journals. Some of the recent publications are:

  • Long-Term Outcomes With Nivolumab Plus Ipilimumab or Nivolumab Alone Versus Ipilimumab in Patients With Advanced Melanoma, 2022, Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich)
  • Adjuvant nivolumab versus ipilimumab in resected stage IIIB-C and stage IV melanoma (CheckMate 238): 4-year results from a multicentre, double-blind, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial, 2020, The Lancet Oncology
  • Five-Year Analysis of Adjuvant Dabrafenib plus Trametinib in Stage III Melanoma, 2020, New England Journal of Medicine
  • Adjuvant pembrolizumab versus placebo in resected stage III melanoma (EORTC 1325-MG/KEYNOTE-054): distant metastasis-free survival results from a double-blind, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial, 2021, The Lancet Oncology
  • Final, 10-Year Outcomes with Nivolumab plus Ipilimumab in Advanced Melanoma, 2024, New England Journal of Medicine

Their frequent collaborators include Paolo A. Ascierto, Michele Del Vecchio, Mario Mandalà, Piotr Rutkowski, and Reinhard Dummer. These collaborations have contributed to an extensive body of work within multiple high-impact venues.

Vanna Chiarion-Sileni has published extensively in several prominent journals, with the most frequent venues being:

  • Journal of Clinical Oncology
  • Annals of Oncology
  • European Journal of Cancer
  • Frontiers in Oncology
  • The Lancet Oncology

Best Publications

  • Combined Nivolumab and Ipilimumab or Monotherapy in Untreated Melanoma.

    James Larkin;Vanna Chiarion-Sileni;Rene Gonzalez;Jean Jacques Grob

  • Nivolumab in previously untreated melanoma without BRAF mutation.

    Caroline Robert;Georgina V. Long;Benjamin Brady;Caroline Dutriaux

  • Overall Survival with Combined Nivolumab and Ipilimumab in Advanced Melanoma

    Jedd D. Wolchok;Vanna Chiarion-Sileni;Rene Gonzalez;Piotr Rutkowski

  • Five-year survival with combined nivolumab and ipilimumab in advanced melanoma: New England Journal of Medicine

    J. Larkin;V. Chiarion-Sileni;R. Gonzalez;J.-J. Grob

  • Dabrafenib in BRAF-mutated metastatic melanoma: a multicentre, open-label, phase 3 randomised controlled trial

    Axel Hauschild;Jean Jacques Grob;Lev V. Demidov;Thomas Jouary

  • Improved Overall Survival in Melanoma with Combined Dabrafenib and Trametinib

    Caroline Robert;Boguslawa Karaszewska;Jacob Schachter;Piotr Rutkowski

  • Adjuvant Nivolumab versus Ipilimumab in Resected Stage III or IV Melanoma

    Jeffrey Weber;Mario Mandala;Michele Del Vecchio;Helen J. Gogas

  • Dabrafenib and trametinib versus dabrafenib and placebo for Val600 BRAF-mutant melanoma: a multicentre, double-blind, phase 3 randomised controlled trial

    Georgina V. Long;Georgina V. Long;Daniil Stroyakovskiy;Helen Gogas;Evgeny Levchenko

  • Adjuvant Dabrafenib plus Trametinib in Stage III BRAF-Mutated Melanoma

    G. V. Long;A. Hauschild;M. Santinami;V. Atkinson

  • Prolonged Survival in Stage III Melanoma with Ipilimumab Adjuvant Therapy

    Alexander M M Eggermont;Vanna Chiarion-Sileni;Jean-Jacques Grob;Reinhard Dummer

  • Adjuvant ipilimumab versus placebo after complete resection of high-risk stage III melanoma (EORTC 18071): a randomised, double-blind, phase 3 trial

    Alexander M M Eggermont;Vanna Chiarion-Sileni;Jean Jacques Grob;Reinhard Dummer

  • Nivolumab plus ipilimumab or nivolumab alone versus ipilimumab alone in advanced melanoma (CheckMate 067): 4-year outcomes of a multicentre, randomised, phase 3 trial.

    Frank Stephen Hodi;Vanna Chiarion-Sileni;Rene Gonzalez;Jean Jacques Grob

  • Encorafenib plus binimetinib versus vemurafenib or encorafenib in patients with BRAF-mutant melanoma (COLUMBUS): a multicentre, open-label, randomised phase 3 trial

    Reinhard Dummer;Paolo A Ascierto;Helen J Gogas;Ana Arance

  • Dabrafenib plus trametinib in patients with BRAFV600-mutant melanoma brain metastases (COMBI-MB): a multicentre, multicohort, open-label, phase 2 trial

    Michael A. Davies;Philippe Saiag;Caroline Robert;Jean Jacques Grob

  • Dabrafenib plus trametinib versus dabrafenib monotherapy in patients with metastatic BRAF V600E/K-mutant melanoma: long-term survival and safety analysis of a phase 3 study.

    G. V. Long;K. T. Flaherty;D. Stroyakovskiy;H. Gogas

  • Efficacy and safety of ipilimumab monotherapy in patients with pretreated advanced melanoma: a multicenter single-arm phase II study

    S. J. O'Day;M. Maio;V. Chiarion-Sileni;T. F. Gajewski

  • Five-Year Survival Rates for Treatment-Naive Patients With Advanced Melanoma Who Received Ipilimumab Plus Dacarbazine in a Phase III Trial

    Michele Maio;Jean Jacques Grob;Steinar Aamdal;Igor Bondarenko

  • Ipilimumab 10 mg/kg versus ipilimumab 3 mg/kg in patients with unresectable or metastatic melanoma: a randomised, double-blind, multicentre, phase 3 trial

    Paolo A. Ascierto;Michele Del Vecchio;Caroline Robert;Andrzej Mackiewicz

  • Efficacy and Safety Outcomes in Patients With Advanced Melanoma Who Discontinued Treatment With Nivolumab and Ipilimumab Because of Adverse Events: A Pooled Analysis of Randomized Phase II and III Trials.

    Dirk Schadendorf;Jedd D. Wolchok;F. Stephen Hodi;Vanna Chiarion-Sileni

  • Long-Term Outcomes With Nivolumab Plus Ipilimumab or Nivolumab Alone Versus Ipilimumab in Patients With Advanced Melanoma

    Jedd D. Wolchok;Vanna Chiarion-Sileni;Rene Gonzalez;Jean-Jacques Grob

Frequent Co-Authors

Paolo A. Ascierto
Paolo A. Ascierto National Institutes of Health
Caroline Robert
Caroline Robert University of Paris-Saclay
Dirk Schadendorf
Dirk Schadendorf University of Duisburg-Essen
Michele Maio
Michele Maio University of Siena
Georgina V. Long
Georgina V. Long University of Sydney
Jean-Jacques Grob
Jean-Jacques Grob Aix-Marseille University
Reinhard Dummer
Reinhard Dummer University of Zurich
James Larkin
James Larkin Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust
Mario Mandalà
Mario Mandalà European Institute of Oncology
Piotr Rutkowski
Piotr Rutkowski Maria Sklodowska-Curie National Research Institute of Oncology

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

The path to a healthcare career is diverse—students aren’t limited to medical school alone. Many opt for nursing, healthcare administration, or specialized roles like medical billing and coding. If you're seeking alternative routes, consider schools that have a reputation as easy nursing schools to get into. These programs may offer fewer entry barriers, making it possible to launch your career in healthcare sooner.

Not all nursing programs require standardized testing, which broadens access even further. Have questions about entry exams? Investigate institutions on this list: do all nursing schools require the teas. Beyond patient care, those interested in the administrative side can explore healthcare administration accelerated degree options—ideal for career changers or professionals seeking advancement.

For individuals interested in technology and office-based roles, best online medical billing and coding schools provide flexible learning with strong job prospects. Choosing the right pathway depends on your interests, timeline, and educational background.

Best Scientists Citing Vanna Chiarion-Sileni

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles