75 Years of Mathematical Oncology

Mathematics has long provided a quantitative framework to interpret cancer biology and treatment. Driven by richer biological and clinical data, the field has evolved into a multidisciplinary and translational endeavor - giving rise to Mathematical Oncology. Yet, the field's strong interdisciplinarity obscures a comprehensive view of its evolution, as well as the boundaries between Mathematical Oncology and adjacent domains. Here, we address this gap through a comprehensive bibliometric analysis spanning 75 years of mathematical research in oncology. Using a manually curated corpus (~1,500 papers) and a large query-based dataset (~19,000 papers), we map the field's conceptual and collaborative development over time. Independent analyses reveal sustained growth, high impact, and pronounced interdisciplinarity, together with a gradual shift from fundamental cancer biology toward therapeutic modeling. This reorientation underpins the emergence of Mathematical Oncology as a distinct field, separate from Systems Biology and Pharmacokinetics / Pharmacodynamics. We show how diverse concepts interlace within Mathematical Oncology, bridging applied mathematics, optimal control, evolutionary theory, and imaging. Collectively, we demonstrate that Mathematical Oncology is not merely the application of mathematics to cancer, but the use of interpretable models integrating clinical, biological, and physical knowledge to improve screening, understand disease evolution, guide therapy, and strengthen forecasting.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)
Published
2026-01-14
DOI
https://doi.org/10.64898/2026.01.13.699306
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Mathematical Biology Tumor Growth
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
41.38
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

75 Years of Mathematical Oncology

Franco Pradelli, François de Kermenguy, David A. Hormuth, Dhananjay Bhaskar et al.
1 citations
bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)
Mathematical Biology Tumor Growth
41.38
article

75 Years of Mathematical Oncology

Franco Pradelli, François de Kermenguy, David A. Hormuth, Dhananjay Bhaskar, Sadegh Marzban, Alexander R.A. Anderson, Katyayni Ganesan, Sara Hamis, Jeffrey West, Guillermo Lorenzo, Maximilian Strobl, Ari Barnett
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Mathematics has long provided a quantitative framework to interpret cancer biology and treatment. Driven by richer biological and clinical data, the field has evolved into a multidisciplinary and translational endeavor - giving rise to Mathematical Oncology. Yet, the field's strong interdisciplinarity obscures a comprehensive view of its evolution, as well as the boundaries between Mathematical Oncology and adjacent domains. Here, we address this gap through a comprehensive bibliometric analysis spanning 75 years of mathematical research in oncology. Using a manually curated corpus (~1,500 papers) and a large query-based dataset (~19,000 papers), we map the field's conceptual and collaborative development over time. Independent analyses reveal sustained growth, high impact, and pronounced interdisciplinarity, together with a gradual shift from fundamental cancer biology toward therapeutic modeling. This reorientation underpins the emergence of Mathematical Oncology as a distinct field, separate from Systems Biology and Pharmacokinetics / Pharmacodynamics. We show how diverse concepts interlace within Mathematical Oncology, bridging applied mathematics, optimal control, evolutionary theory, and imaging. Collectively, we demonstrate that Mathematical Oncology is not merely the application of mathematics to cancer, but the use of interpretable models integrating clinical, biological, and physical knowledge to improve screening, understand disease evolution, guide therapy, and strengthen forecasting.

bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)
Universidade da Coruña (ES), Uppsala University (SE), Cleveland Clinic (US), University of Wisconsin–Madison (US), Institute of Cancer Research (GB), Moffitt Cancer Center (US), NIHR Imperial Biomedical Research Centre (GB), Numerical Method (China) (CN), University Hospital Cologne (DE), Dana-Farber Brigham Cancer Center (US), Imperial College London (GB), The University of Texas at Austin (US)
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 1%
Mathematical Biology Tumor Growth
41.38
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.