万维提示：

1、投稿方式：在线投稿。

2、期刊网址：

https://www.cell.com/cancer-cell/home

3、投稿网址：

https://www.editorialmanager.com/cancer-cell

4、官网邮箱：cancer@cell.com

更多编辑邮箱请查看期刊官网信息。

5、官网电话：+1 617 397 2800

6、期刊刊期：月刊，一年出版十二期。

2021年5月20日星期四

投稿须知【官网信息】

Information for authors

This page describes our policies and provides information that we think will be helpful to you as you prepare manuscripts for submission and publication. If you have submitted a paper and want information about the status of the paper, please log in to our online manuscript submission system, Editorial Manager (EM). If you run into any problems or if you have specific questions, you can always e-mail us at cancer@cell.com or call +1-617-397-2800.

About the journal

Cancer Cell provides a high-profile forum to promote major advances in cancer research and oncology. The primary criterion for considering manuscripts is whether the studies provide major advances into answering important questions relevant to naturally occurring cancers. Cancer Cell particularly welcomes translational research.

Cancer Cell is also interested in publishing clinical investigations, in particular those that lead to establishing new paradigms in the treatment, diagnosis, or prevention of cancers; those that provide important insights into cancer biology beyond what has been revealed by preclinical studies; and those that are mechanism-based proof-of-principle clinical studies.

Editorial evaluation timeline

We read and evaluate every submission, and we try our best to get back to you quickly. We are mindful of how long it can take to publish a paper, so we work with authors and reviewers to minimize that time. Here’s how long each step in the process usually takes:

Initial decision to review 5–7 days after submission

Decision after review 4–5 weeks after submission

Anticipated timeframe for suggested revisions   2–3 months (with flexibility if needed)

Time to print publication  Within 3 months of acceptance

Presubmission inquiries

Unsure if your paper is suitable for Cancer Cell? Send us a presubmission inquiry at cancer@cell.com, and we'll let you know what we think in 2–5 business days. Please include a title, an abstract, and an explanation of why your paper is significant and broadly interesting.

Relationship between Cell Press journals

Co-consideration

If you think your paper might be suitable for two or more Cell Press journals, you now have the opportunity for simultaneous consideration at multiple journals using Cell Press Community Review. With Cell Press Community Review, all the Cell Press life and health science journals of your choice provide unified consideration of your manuscript via one handling editor who works closely with you, your chosen journals’ editorial teams, and expert reviewers from the field to help you navigate a path to publication with Cell Press. To take advantage of this unique opportunity, please submit directly to the Cell Press Community submission site. For more information, view our Instructions for Authors and FAQ or reach out to us at community@cell.com with any questions.

Transfer of papers between Cell Press journals

We know it can be time consuming to serially submit your paper to multiple journals, restarting the review process each time. Cell Press publishes many journals, and we give you the opportunity to transfer your paper, along with the reviews and the reviewers' identities, from one journal to another. If you have questions about the suitability of your paper for transfer, please contact the editor of the receiving journal. If you have general questions about the transfer process, please refer to our FAQs on article transfers. Often, the Editor of the target journal will be able to reach a decision based on the existing reviews. Occasionally, the Editor may seek comments from additional reviewers. If you transfer your paper using our online system, you will have a chance to edit your files before they are sent to the receiving journal. You can always submit your paper to another Cell Press journal without mentioning the first review process. In this case, the manuscript will be evaluated as a regular new submission.

Editorial policies

Preprint servers

We are happy to consider manuscripts previously posted on preprint servers such as arXiv, bioRxiv, BioRN, ChemRxiv, or SSRN. Three of our broad scope journals, Cell Reports, Current Biology, and iScience, also support direct submission of manuscripts from bioRxiv via transfer of manuscript files and metadata to the journal’s Editorial Manager site. Our support for posting of preprints only applies to the original submitted version of the manuscript; we do not support posting to preprint servers revisions that respond to editorial input and peer review or final accepted manuscripts. Once your paper is published, we encourage you to update the preprint record with a link to the final published article. Please see our prepublication publicity policies for more information on sharing your work at the prepublication stage.

Pre-registration

Cell Press journals support the pre-registration of both clinical trials and analysis plans in curated, public repositories when authors consider it appropriate. Individual Cell Press journals may require pre-registration of clinical trials in a WHO-compliant registry. If authors inform us that they have pre-registered their studies, their published article will indicate where the pre-registered information can be accessed.

Related manuscripts

If you or your coauthors have any related papers submitted or in press elsewhere, you need to let us know and include them with your initial submission (or with your revision if they were submitted during revision). We ask this because having access to related papers often helps us (and reviewers) to assess the submitted work, and it can help prevent potentially difficult scenarios down the road. Failure to provide copies of related manuscripts may delay the review process and may be grounds for rejection. As a matter of publishing ethics, we cannot consider any paper that contains data that have been published or submitted for publication elsewhere.

Authorship

Our authorship policy accommodates diverse types of research, providing a framework that makes clear the contributions of each author.

Author contributions section: To make author contributions transparent, all research articles should include an author contributions section. Please describe the contributions concisely and use initials to indicate author identity. We encourage you to use the CRediT taxonomy, which offers standardized descriptions of author contributions. An authors contributions section is not required for front-matter articles.

Corresponding author and lead contact: You must designate at least one corresponding author and only one lead contact.

Corresponding Author: We prefer that each paper have a single corresponding author because we think that the ownership and responsibility that are inherent in corresponding authorship will promote best practices in design and performance of experiments, analysis of results, organization and retention of original data, and preparation of figures and text.

That said, we understand that, for some studies, particularly for interdisciplinary ones, multiple authors may bear the responsibilities of a corresponding author. If you feel strongly and have compelling reasons, you may include additional corresponding authors. We may ask you to explain your rationale and to verify that all corresponding authors understand their responsibilities (listed below). We ask that you describe each corresponding author's specific contributions in the Author Contributions section.

Lead contact: The lead contact is the corresponding author who is also responsible for communicating with the journal (before and after publication) and accountable for fulfilling requests for reagents and resources and for arbitrating decisions and disputes. For research papers with multiple corresponding authors, please designate one (and only one) corresponding author as the lead contact. If there is only one corresponding author, then that author is automatically also the lead contact. You should denote the lead contact with a footnote in the author list (e.g., "5Lead contact").

Responsibilities of the corresponding author and lead contact: All corresponding authors bear responsibilities 1–8 below; the lead contact additionally bears responsibility 9.

Supervising the work

Being responsible for all data, figures, and text

Ensuring that authorship is granted appropriately to contributors

Ensuring that all authors approve the content and submission of the paper, as well as edits made through the revision and production processes

Ensuring adherence to all editorial and submission policies

Identifying and declaring competing interests on behalf of all authors

Identifying and disclosing related work by any co-authors under consideration elsewhere

Archiving unprocessed data and ensuring that figures accurately present the original data (see Data Archiving section)

Arbitrating decisions and disputes and ensuring communication with the journal (before and after publication), sharing of any relevant information or updates to co-authors, and accountability for fulfillment of requests for reagents and resources

Equal contributions: The lead contact is the only designation that we strictly limit to one author. In addition to noting corresponding authors with an asterisk, you may use numbered footnotes to designate senior authors and otherwise equally contributing authors. The following footnote should be used for authors who have made equal contributions: “6These authors contributed equally”. Senior authors can be designated with a footnote, e.g., “6Senior author”. Please use the author contributions section of the manuscript to more fully describe each author’s specific contributions. 

Authorship disputes: All authors should discuss and agree on author order and authorship designations. We expect that everyone listed as an author contributed substantively to the paper.

We do not adjudicate authorship disputes. These disputes should be resolved by the researchers involved and/or their institutions. If we become aware of a dispute we will suspend consideration of the paper until the dispute is resolved. In this case (and when authors request changes to authorship) authorship should be approved in writing by all authors.

Competing interests

Transparency is essential for a reader’s trust in the scientific process and for the credibility of published articles. At Cell Press, we feel that disclosure of competing interests is a critical aspect of transparency. Therefore, we ask that all authors disclose any financial or other interests related to the submitted work that (1) could affect or have the perception of affecting the author’s objectivity, or (2) could influence or have the perception of influencing the content of the article.

Prior to acceptance, author groups of all article types (front or back matter) are asked to complete and submit a “declaration of interests” form. We also ask that authors disclose any competing interests in the article in a dedicated declaration of interests section (see below).

Complete details of our declaration of interests policy and additional author instructions are available here.

Inclusion and diversity statement

Starting in January 2021, we will require authors to fill out an inclusion and diversity form. This is a new initiative at Cell Press designed to give authors a mechanism to document inclusion and diversity information that is relevant to their paper and the option to showcase it in the paper itself by adding a dedicated inclusion and diversity statement. The concept underlying this initiative is similar to existing statements about declarations of interests, author contributions, and data and code availability but focuses on highlighting aspects of the paper that are relevant for inclusion and diversity. It is purposely multifunctional and designed to give authors a venue to express ways in which their work, their research group, or both are contributing to help science become a more inclusive and diverse enterprise overall.

Please find more information on this here, and preview the form here.

For more information about our rationale for this initiative, please read our editorial.

Data and image processing

Data processing is sometimes necessary. When it is, please keep it minimal and ensure that the final figures accurately reflect the original data. In general, please make all processing transparent. Here are some specific guidelines:

Any alterations should be applied to the entire image. When this is impossible (e.g., when a single color channel on a microscopy image is altered), please clearly explain the alteration in the figure legend.

If you remove lanes from gels and blots or consolidate your data in any way, you must make the alterations obvious.

Only compare data that are appropriate to compare (e.g., data from the same experiment).

Individual images should not be used in multiple figures unless the figures describe different aspects of the same experiment (e.g., multiple experiments were performed simultaneously with a single control experiment). If an image is used in multiple figures, please clearly state the reason in the legend.

Image screening

We screen all accepted papers for image irregularities. If there is a question about a figure, either throughout this process or during the review process, we will work with the lead contact to resolve the issue. This is done on a case-by-case basis, but generally, we’ll ask you to supply the original, unprocessed data, along with descriptions of how the experiments were performed and how the figures were prepared. Based on this, we will let you know if the current form of the figure is OK or if we’ll need a revised figure. If the problem is more serious, we may need to delay publication while we work through the issues, or we may decide not to publish the paper. Before you submit a new paper, a revision, or the final paper, it is critically important that you check the original data and make sure you know and are happy with how the figures were prepared from them. We view this as the responsibility of the corresponding author(s). As the final step before submission, we encourage you to go over all of the figures once more and connect all of the data in the figures to the original, unprocessed data. You might find our blog post on avoiding common mistakes in figure preparation helpful.

Data archiving

We may ask you for your original, unprocessed data, so please take appropriate steps to preserve your data. Authors must archive all unprocessed data related to their paper, and we recommend archiving the data used for the figures in the paper together in a single location to aid in any future queries or post-publication issues, and ensuring appropriate archiving and backup systems are in place. We also strongly encourage you to upload your original data to an appropriate figure/data repository such as Mendeley Data or Dryad, as access to original data can increase reader confidence in the findings. For more detailed instructions on publishing original data with Mendeley Data, click here. If issues with your findings arise, failure to produce original data will make resolving those issues much more difficult and can be grounds for retraction.

Process for post-publication issues

We will thoroughly investigate any issues with data or figures that we publish. While we do not monitor the internet or social media, we follow up on all clearly documented concerns that are directly brought to our attention (from authors or concerned readers, named and anonymous). If we think that there is reason to investigate, we will discuss the concerns with the lead contact. This process generally involves asking for the original, unprocessed data, along with descriptions of how the experiments in question were performed and how the figures were prepared. We will assess these materials, and we may consult with reviewers or other experts. There are several potential outcomes of the process. First, we may take no further action; in this case, we may publish an editorial note to describe the process and explain why we are taking no further action. Second, if we think the issues are resolvable with a correction, we may ask the authors to prepare a correction statement. Third, if we uncover serious issues, we may ask the authors to retract the paper and we will work with them to prepare a retraction statement. Fourth, if the timeline to a potential resolution seems long, we might publish an editorial expression of concern to alert the community that an investigation is ongoing. At any point during this process, if our analysis uncovers potentially serious issues, we will generally ask authors to alert their institution and funding bodies.

Correcting the scientific record is a priority for us. Because we consider the investigation process confidential, we don’t report back in detail to the person who contacted us with the concern. As the process can include gathering and evaluating original data, discussing with authors, and collaborating with institutional investigations, it can take some time. We are committed to making sure that the investigation moves forward quickly, but as these are serious and important matters, we prioritize reaching the outcome that best serves the scientific community over reaching the fastest outcome.

……

更多详情：

https://www.cell.com/cancer-cell/authors