Peer Review Policy-Cancer Cell Research
Cancer Cell Research is committed to maintaining the highest standards of scientific quality, transparency, and fairness in its editorial and peer review processes. All submissions undergo rigorous peer review to ensure the validity, originality, and relevance of published work in the field of cancer biology and oncology.
1. Peer Review Model
All manuscripts submitted to Cancer Cell Research are evaluated through a single-blind peer review process, in which the identities of reviewers are kept confidential, while authors' identities are known to reviewers. This model ensures unbiased scientific evaluation while preserving reviewer anonymity.
. Submission and Review System
2The journal utilizes the ScholarOne Manuscripts online submission and review platform. This system enables efficient handling of manuscripts, transparent tracking of peer review progress, and secure communication between authors, editors, and reviewers.
Authors must submit all manuscripts and revisions through the ScholarOne system: https://mc04.manuscriptcentral.com/advinccr3. Editorial Assessment
Upon submission, all manuscripts undergo initial assessment by the Editor-in-Chief or Associate Editors to determine suitability for the journal in terms of scope, scientific rigor, and originality. Manuscripts deemed appropriate are assigned to expert reviewers for further evaluation.
4. Selection of Reviewers
Reviewers are selected based on their expertise, research background, and publication history relevant to the manuscript’s topic. The editorial team ensures that reviewers have no conflicts of interest with the authors or the content of the manuscript. Typically, two to three independent reviewers are invited to evaluate each manuscript. Additional reviewers may be consulted when necessary to resolve discrepancies or to obtain specialized input.
5. Reviewer Evaluation Criteria
Reviewers are asked to assess: The scientific novelty and significance of the work, Methodological rigor and reproducibility, Clarity of presentation and logical structure, Appropriateness of data interpretation, Relevance to cancer research and potential translational impact, Reviewers provide detailed written reports and recommendations, including suggestions for improvement. Possible recommendations include: acceptance, minor revision, major revision, or rejection.
6. Editorial Decision
The final decision on each manuscript is made by the handling editor, in consultation with the Editor-in-Chief when appropriate. Editorial decisions are based on reviewer feedback, the quality of revisions, and the overall contribution of the work to the field. Authors will typically receive an editorial decision within 4-6 weeks from the date of submission. Revisions are evaluated promptly, with every effort made to ensure timely publication.
7. Confidentiality and Ethics
All submitted manuscripts and reviewer reports are treated as confidential documents. Reviewers are required to maintain confidentiality and are not permitted to share, discuss, or use the information contained in the manuscript outside of the review process. Cancer Cell Research follows the COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) guidelines in cases of suspected misconduct, conflicts of interest, or ethical violations.
8. Appeals
Authors who disagree with an editorial decision may submit a formal appeal via the ScholarOne system, providing a detailed justification. Appeals will be reviewed by a senior editor not involved in the original decision, and a final decision will be made based on scientific merit.
9. Recognition of Reviewers
We recognize the critical contributions of peer reviewers in upholding the quality of published research. Reviewers may be acknowledged in an annual list (with their consent), and we actively encourage participation in recognition platforms such as Publons.