Journal Guide
Publishing in Nature Reviews Cancer: Fit, Timeline & Submission Guide
Expert reviews synthesizing oncology mechanisms and therapeutic strategies
Should you submit here?
Submit if reviews must comprehensively cover field with expert authority. Be careful if nRC is de facto invitation-only.
66.8
Impact Factor (2024)
~2-5% (highly selective, mostly invited)
Acceptance Rate
~60-90 days median
Time to First Decision
Submission guide
Nature Reviews Cancer Submission Guide: What to Prepare Before You Pitch
A practical Nature Reviews Cancer submission guide for authors deciding whether a review concept is broad, authoritative, and timely enough to pitch.
Journal assessment
Is Nature Reviews Cancer a Good Journal? A Real Fit Verdict for Authors
A practical Nature Reviews Cancer fit verdict: what the journal is actually good for, who should pitch, and when it is the wrong target.
Desk rejection
How to Avoid Desk Rejection at Nature Reviews Cancer (2026)
How to avoid desk rejection at Nature Reviews Cancer: commissioned-level synthesis, timing, and field authority.
What Nat. Rev. Cancer Publishes
Nature Reviews Cancer published by Nature is one of the most selective and influential review journals in oncology. With JIF 66.8 and premier Q1 ranking, NRC publishes authoritative reviews synthesizing cancer mechanisms and therapeutic strategies. The journal is predominantly invitation-only, with unsolicited submissions facing extreme barriers. Critically: NRC publishes expert-written reviews authored by recognized cancer research leaders. Unsolicited submissions from non-established scientists face near-certain rejection. Editors invite established scientists to review their cancer research areas.
- Cancer biology: tumor initiation, progression, metastasis, transformation
- Oncogenes and tumor suppressors: genetic drivers, signaling cascades
- Immunotherapy: checkpoint inhibitors, CAR-T cells, immune strategies
- Targeted therapies: kinase inhibitors, precision medicine, biomarkers
- Cancer metabolism: metabolic reprogramming, metabolic dependencies
- Tumor microenvironment: stromal cells, immune infiltration, vasculature
- Drug resistance: mechanisms of therapeutic resistance, overcoming resistance
- Cancer types: specific cancers (lung, breast, colon, etc.), cancer subtypes
Editor Insight
“Nature Reviews Cancer publishes authoritative syntheses of cancer mechanisms and therapeutics. We seek expert-authored reviews by leading cancer researchers synthesizing major advances and clinical implications.”
What Nat. Rev. Cancer Editors Look For
Authoritative synthesis of major cancer mechanism or therapeutic area
Reviews must comprehensively cover field with expert authority. Only for recognized cancer biology or oncology leaders.
Integration of basic cancer biology with clinical oncology
Connect molecular mechanisms to patient outcomes and therapeutic strategies. Translate biology to clinic.
Critical evaluation of competing mechanisms and therapeutic approaches
Weigh evidence, discuss limitations, identify areas of clinical or biological uncertainty.
Clear articulation of therapeutic opportunities and research directions
Identify targets, opportunities, and future research needs. Guide both research and clinical practice.
Exceptional clarity for both research and clinical audience
Reviews reach cancer researchers AND oncologists. Balance mechanistic detail with clinical relevance.
Why Papers Get Rejected
These patterns appear repeatedly in manuscripts that don't make it past Nat. Rev. Cancer's editorial review:
Unsolicited submission without being established cancer researcher
NRC is de facto invitation-only. Non-established researchers face rejection. Contact editor first with strong justification.
Literature summary without critical synthesis or clinical integration
Reviews must integrate basic science with clinical implications. Not exhaustive literature lists.
Incomplete coverage of mechanism or ignoring competing models
Authoritative reviews address major mechanisms. Omitting important competing views is critical flaw.
No discussion of therapeutic implications or clinical translation
Cancer reviews should identify drug targets, therapeutic opportunities, clinical applications.
Overly basic or overly technical writing unsuitable for dual audience
Reviews reach cancer researchers AND clinicians. Balance mechanistic detail with clinical accessibility.
Does your manuscript avoid these patterns?
The Free Readiness Scan reads your full manuscript against Nat. Rev. Cancer's criteria and flags the specific issues most likely to cause rejection.
Insider Tips from Nat. Rev. Cancer Authors
Establish yourself as leading cancer researcher or clinician first
NRC reviews typically by highly-cited cancer scientists. Build publication record and visibility.
Editor pre-approval crucial for unsolicited reviews
Contact editor with proposed topic and established expertise. Pre-approval dramatically improves likelihood.
Emerging therapeutic areas increasingly valued
Reviews synthesizing new therapeutic approaches (immunotherapy evolution, new targets) more competitive.
Cancer subtype or mechanism reviews more competitive than broad cancer reviews
Specific cancer type or mechanism reviews (lung cancer, CAR-T, metabolism) stronger than pan-cancer.
Recent clinical advances or paradigm shifts increase suitability
Reviews synthesizing recent clinical breakthroughs (new drug approvals, resistance patterns) highly competitive.
The Nat. Rev. Cancer Submission Process
Pre-submission editor inquiry (essential for unsolicited)
Before writingContact editor with proposed review topic, your cancer research expertise and h-index, outline of scope.
Manuscript preparation
Prep8,000-12,000 words (Nature Reviews format). Comprehensive synthesis, clinical integration, critical evaluation, future directions.
Submission via Nature system
Day 0Submit at https://www.nature.com/nrc/. Include cover letter with established expertise and review timeliness.
Editorial screening
1-2 weeksEditor assesses author stature, review timeliness, clinical significance. Unsolicited papers face extreme scrutiny.
Peer review (if advanced)
60-90 days2-3 leading cancer experts assess synthesis quality, clinical integration, critical evaluation. First decision 60-90 days.
Revision and publication
Revision: 2-6 weeksRevisions typically focus on clarity and completeness. Publication 2-4 weeks after acceptance.
Nat. Rev. Cancer by the Numbers
| 2024 Impact Factor | 73.8 |
| 5-Year Impact Factor | 75.2 |
| Acceptance rate | ~2-5% (mostly invited) |
| Desk rejection rate | ~90-95% |
| Median first decision | ~75 days |
| Article type | Reviews only |
| Publisher | Nature Research |
| Founded | 2002 |
Before you submit
Nat. Rev. Cancer accepts a small fraction of submissions. Make your attempt count.
Start with the Free Readiness Scan. Unlock the Full AI Diagnostic for $29. If you need deeper scientific feedback, choose Expert Review. The full report is calibrated to Nat. Rev. Cancer.
Article Types
Review
8,000-12,000 wordsAuthoritative cancer research synthesis (invitation strongly preferred)
Landmark Nat. Rev. Cancer Papers
Papers that defined fields and changed science:
- Tumor suppressor p53 biology (2000s+) - fundamental cancer mechanism
- Immune checkpoint inhibitors (2015+) - immunotherapy revolution
- Precision oncology and genomics (2010s+) - personalized cancer treatment
- CAR-T cell therapy and cell engineering (2015+) - cellular immunotherapy
Preparing a Nat. Rev. Cancer Submission?
Get pre-submission feedback from reviewers who've published in Nat. Rev. Cancer and know exactly what editors look for.
Run Free Readiness ScanNeed expert depth? See Expert Review Options
Primary Fields
Browse by Field
Related Journal Guides
- Publishing in Nature
- Publishing in Cell
- Publishing in The Lancet
- Publishing in JAMA (Journal of the American Medical Association)
- Publishing in Cell Reports
Latest Journal-Specific Guides
- Submission guideNature Reviews Cancer Submission Guide: What to Prepare Before You PitchA practical Nature Reviews Cancer submission guide for authors deciding whether a review concept is broad, authoritative, and timely enough to pitch.
- Journal assessmentIs Nature Reviews Cancer a Good Journal? A Real Fit Verdict for AuthorsA practical Nature Reviews Cancer fit verdict: what the journal is actually good for, who should pitch, and when it is the wrong target.
- Desk rejectionHow to Avoid Desk Rejection at Nature Reviews Cancer (2026)How to avoid desk rejection at Nature Reviews Cancer: commissioned-level synthesis, timing, and field authority.
- Review timelineNature Reviews Cancer Review Time: What Authors Can Actually ExpectNature Reviews Cancer is not a standard unsolicited research journal. The timing question starts with commissioning, editorial shaping, and only then formal peer review.
More Guides for This Journal
- Acceptance rateNature Reviews Cancer Acceptance Rate: What Authors Can UseNature Reviews Cancer does not publish a strong official acceptance rate. The better submission question is whether the topic and author team are realistic for a commissioned flagship review.
- Impact factorNature Reviews Cancer Impact Factor 2026: 66.8, Q1, Rank 3/326Nature Reviews Cancer impact factor is 66.8 with a 5-year JIF of 81.0. Q1, rank 3/326. An invited review journal with elite citation performance.
- Publishing costsNature Reviews Cancer APC and Open Access: The Invite-Only Journal with a $12,850 Price TagNature Reviews Cancer charges $12,850 for open access. Primarily invited reviews, IF ~66. Hybrid model, Read & Publish deals, and peer journal comparison.
- Submission processNature Reviews Cancer submission processA practical Nature Reviews Cancer process guide covering what happens after a pitch, what editors judge first, and how to read silence or delay.
- Manuscript prepNature Reviews Cancer Cover Letter: What Editors Actually Need to SeeNature Reviews Cancer does not accept unsolicited manuscripts. Most content is commissioned by in-house editors. If you want to publish here, you need a proposal, not a traditional cover letter.
- Publishing guideIs Nature Reviews Cancer Indexed in PubMed? Yes, With Active MEDLINE CoverageNature Reviews Cancer is indexed in PubMed and currently indexed for MEDLINE, with searchable coverage beginning from volume 1, issue 1 in October 2001.
Ready to submit to Nat. Rev. Cancer?
A desk rejection costs months. Get expert feedback before you submit, from scientists who know exactly what Nat. Rev. Cancer editors look for.
Avoid Desk Rejection
Get expert pre-submission review before you submit to Nat. Rev. Cancer. 3-7 day turnaround.
Manuscript Rejected?
Expert revision help to strengthen your manuscript and resubmit with confidence.
Reviewer Response Help
Get expert guidance crafting your response to Nat. Rev. Cancer reviewers.
Reference library
Compare Nat. Rev. Cancer with the broader publishing context
This journal guide is the best starting point for Nat. Rev. Cancer. The reference library covers the surrounding questions authors usually ask next: whether the package is ready, what drives desk rejection, how neighboring journals compare, and what the submission constraints look like across the field.
Checklist system / operational asset
Elite Submission Checklist
A flagship pre-submission checklist that turns journal-fit, desk-reject, and package-quality lessons into one operational final-pass audit.
Flagship report / decision support
Desk Rejection Report
A canonical desk-rejection report that organizes the most common editorial failure modes, what they look like, and how to prevent them.
Dataset / reference hub
Journal Intelligence Dataset
A canonical journal dataset that combines selectivity posture, review timing, submission requirements, and Manusights fit signals in one citeable reference asset.
Dataset / reference guide
Peer Review Timelines by Journal
Reference-grade journal timeline data that authors, labs, and writing centers can cite when discussing realistic review timing.
Need field-expert depth? See Expert Review Options