Ingrid A.M. Mandjes

2.7k total citations
37 papers, 1.2k citations indexed

About

Ingrid A.M. Mandjes is a scholar working on Oncology, Cancer Research and Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine. According to data from OpenAlex, Ingrid A.M. Mandjes has authored 37 papers receiving a total of 1.2k indexed citations (citations by other indexed papers that have themselves been cited), including 28 papers in Oncology, 18 papers in Cancer Research and 9 papers in Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine. Recurrent topics in Ingrid A.M. Mandjes's work include HER2/EGFR in Cancer Research (18 papers), Cancer Treatment and Pharmacology (17 papers) and Breast Cancer Treatment Studies (15 papers). Ingrid A.M. Mandjes is often cited by papers focused on HER2/EGFR in Cancer Research (18 papers), Cancer Treatment and Pharmacology (17 papers) and Breast Cancer Treatment Studies (15 papers). Ingrid A.M. Mandjes collaborates with scholars based in Netherlands, Belgium and Spain. Ingrid A.M. Mandjes's co-authors include Jelle Wesseling, Gabe S. Sonke, Sabine C. Linn, Erik van Werkhoven, Inge Kemper, Sjoerd Rodenhuis, Mette S. van Ramshorst, W.W. ten Bokkel Huinink, Jos H. Beijnen and Irma M. Oving and has published in prestigious journals such as Journal of Clinical Oncology, Cancer Research and The Lancet Oncology.

In The Last Decade

Ingrid A.M. Mandjes

36 papers receiving 1.1k citations

Peers — A (Enhanced Table)

Peers by citation overlap · career bar shows stage (early→late) cites · hero ref

Name	h						Papers	Cites
Ingrid A.M. Mandjes Netherlands	16	677	497	248	193	168	37	1.2k
Stephen P. Anthony United States	14	881 1.3×	603 1.2×	482 1.9×	90 0.5×	368 2.2×	53	1.5k
Koichiro Tsugawa Japan	20	547 0.8×	648 1.3×	280 1.1×	186 1.0×	169 1.0×	105	1.3k
Mythili Shastry United States	15	706 1.0×	291 0.6×	396 1.6×	285 1.5×	235 1.4×	38	1.2k
N. Gabrail United States	14	569 0.8×	309 0.6×	288 1.2×	64 0.3×	221 1.3×	32	924
Xochiquetzal J. Geiger United States	17	450 0.7×	259 0.5×	343 1.4×	128 0.7×	149 0.9×	44	1.0k
Gayle Jameson United States	19	944 1.4×	556 1.1×	546 2.2×	83 0.4×	399 2.4×	76	1.6k
Jiayi Wu China	20	853 1.3×	656 1.3×	281 1.1×	147 0.8×	223 1.3×	87	1.3k
Arris J. Henderson United States	8	424 0.6×	186 0.4×	454 1.8×	320 1.7×	128 0.8×	8	1.0k
Shoichiro Ohtani Japan	19	939 1.4×	375 0.8×	371 1.5×	64 0.3×	399 2.4×	92	1.4k
Gunnar Schütz Germany	9	530 0.8×	150 0.3×	353 1.4×	82 0.4×	333 2.0×	15	1.2k

Countries citing papers authored by Ingrid A.M. Mandjes

Since Specialization

Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of Ingrid A.M. Mandjes's research. It shows the number of citations coming from papers published by authors working in each country. You can also color the map by specialization and compare the number of citations received by Ingrid A.M. Mandjes with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Ingrid A.M. Mandjes more than expected).

Fields of papers citing papers by Ingrid A.M. Mandjes

Since Specialization

Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers produced by Ingrid A.M. Mandjes. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the papers produced by Ingrid A.M. Mandjes. The network helps show where Ingrid A.M. Mandjes may publish in the future.

Co-authorship network of co-authors of Ingrid A.M. Mandjes

This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Ingrid A.M. Mandjes. A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Ingrid A.M. Mandjes based on the total number of citations received by their joint publications. Widths of edges represent the number of papers authors have co-authored together. Node borders signify the number of papers an author published with Ingrid A.M. Mandjes. Ingrid A.M. Mandjes is excluded from the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.

All Works

Sort: Min cites: Since: Top N: Style:

20 of 20 papers shown

Voort, Anna van der, Ingrid A.M. Mandjes, Mariëtte J Agterof, et al.. (2025). Abstract RF1-03: Three-year event-free survival (EFS) of the multicenter phase II TRAIN-3 study evaluating image-guided optimization of neoadjuvant chemotherapy duration in stage II and III HER2-positive breast cancer (BOOG 2018-01). Clinical Cancer Research. 31(12_Supplement). RF1–3. 1 indexed citations

Nederlof, Iris, Gil Awada, Hugo M. Horlings, et al.. (2024). LBA11 Neoadjuvant nivolumab/relatlimab or nivolumab/ipilimumab in triple negative breast cancer with high tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs). Annals of Oncology. 35. S1206–S1206. 3 indexed citations

Voorwerk, Leonie, Sara Balduzzi, Roberto Salgado, et al.. (2023). Unleashing NK- and CD8 T cells by combining monalizumab and trastuzumab for metastatic HER2-positive breast cancer: Results of the MIMOSA trial. The Breast. 70. 76–81. 15 indexed citations

Steenbruggen, Tessa G., et al.. (2023). Abstract OT2-15-01: COntinue the SaMe systemic therapy after local ablative therapy for Oligoprogression in metastatic breast cancer - the COSMO study. Cancer Research. 83(5_Supplement). OT2–15.

Isaeva, Olga I., Iris Nederlof, Bram Boeckx, et al.. (2023). 163MO Single-cell T cell dynamics induced by neoadjuvant nivolumab +/- ipilimumab in early triple negative breast cancer with tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (BELLINI trial). Immuno-Oncology Technology. 20. 100622–100622. 1 indexed citations

Voort, Anna van der, Mette S. van Ramshorst, Erik van Werkhoven, et al.. (2020). Three-year follow-up of neoadjuvant chemotherapy with or without anthracyclines in the presence of dual HER2-blockade for HER2-positive breast cancer (TRAIN-2): A randomized phase III trial.. Journal of Clinical Oncology. 38(15_suppl). 501–501. 24 indexed citations

Ramshorst, Mette S. van, Anna van der Voort, Erik van Werkhoven, et al.. (2018). Neoadjuvant chemotherapy with or without anthracyclines in the presence of dual HER2 blockade for HER2-positive breast cancer (TRAIN-2): a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial. The Lancet Oncology. 19(12). 1630–1640. 245 indexed citations

Kok, Marleen, Erik van Werkhoven, Mark Opdam, et al.. (2018). Adjuvant dose-dense doxorubicin-cyclophosphamide versus docetaxel-doxorubicin-cyclophosphamide for high-risk breast cancer: First results of the randomised MATADOR trial (BOOG 2004-04). European Journal of Cancer. 102. 40–48. 10 indexed citations

Ramshorst, Mette S. van, Erik van Werkhoven, Ingrid A.M. Mandjes, et al.. (2017). Trastuzumab in combination with weekly paclitaxel and carboplatin as neo-adjuvant treatment for HER2-positive breast cancer: The TRAIN-study. European Journal of Cancer. 74. 47–54. 18 indexed citations

10.

Kok, Marleen, Hugo M. Horlings, T. Wiersma, et al.. (2017). Adaptive phase II randomized non-comparative trial of nivolumab after induction treatment in triple negative breast cancer: TONIC-trial. Annals of Oncology. 28. v608–v608. 21 indexed citations

11.

Steenbruggen, Tessa G., Astrid N. Scholten, Ingrid A.M. Mandjes, et al.. (2017). Selecting patients with oligo-metastatic breast cancer harboring homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) for intensified chemotherapy: The OLIGO-study. Annals of Oncology. 28. v104–v104. 1 indexed citations

12.

Ramshorst, Mette S. van, Erik van Werkhoven, Ingrid A.M. Mandjes, et al.. (2017). A phase III trial of neoadjuvant chemotherapy with or without anthracyclines in the presence of dual HER2-blockade for HER2+ breast cancer: The TRAIN-2 study (BOOG 2012-03).. Journal of Clinical Oncology. 35(15_suppl). 507–507. 5 indexed citations

13.

Werkhoven, Erik van, Ingrid A.M. Mandjes, Jelle Wesseling, et al.. (2015). The prognostic value of the neoadjuvant response index in triple-negative breast cancer: validation and comparison with pathological complete response as outcome measure. Breast Cancer Research and Treatment. 153(1). 145–152. 3 indexed citations

14.

Schouten, Philip C., Miangela M. Laclé, Joyce Sanders, et al.. (2015). Copy number profiling by array comparative genomic hybridization identifies frequently occurring BRCA2‐like male breast cancer. Genes Chromosomes and Cancer. 54(12). 734–744. 10 indexed citations

15.

Sonke, Gabe S., Ingrid A.M. Mandjes, M. Holtkamp, et al.. (2013). Paclitaxel, Carboplatin, and Trastuzumab in a Neo-adjuvant Regimen for HER2-positive Breast Cancer. The Breast Journal. 19(4). 419–426. 11 indexed citations

16.

Lips, Esther H., Lennart Mulder, Jorma J. de Ronde, et al.. (2011). Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in ER+ HER2− breast cancer: response prediction based on immunohistochemical and molecular characteristics. Breast Cancer Research and Treatment. 131(3). 827–836. 66 indexed citations

17.

Rodenhuis, Sjoerd, Ingrid A.M. Mandjes, Jelle Wesseling, et al.. (2009). A simple system for grading the response of breast cancer to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Annals of Oncology. 21(3). 481–487. 37 indexed citations

18.

Terwogt, Jetske M. Meerum, W.W. ten Bokkel Huinink, Jan H.M. Schellens, et al.. (2001). Phase I clinical and pharmacokinetic study of PNU166945, a novel water-soluble polymer-conjugated prodrug of paclitaxel. Anti-Cancer Drugs. 12(4). 315–323. 192 indexed citations

19.

Simonetti, Giovanni, Anne-Charlotte Dubbelman, W W ten Bokkel Huinink, et al.. (1994). Toxicity grading systems. Annals of Oncology. 5(2). 113–117. 49 indexed citations

20.

Mannens, M., E. M. Bleeker‐Wagemakers, Jet Bliek, et al.. (1989). Autosomal dominant aniridia linked to the chromosome 11p13 markers catalase and D11S151 in a large Dutch family. Cytogenetic and Genome Research. 52(1-2). 32–36. 27 indexed citations

Rankless uses publication and citation data sourced from OpenAlex, an open and comprehensive bibliographic database. While OpenAlex provides broad and valuable coverage of the global research landscape, it—like all bibliographic datasets—has inherent limitations. These include incomplete records, variations in author disambiguation, differences in journal indexing, and delays in data updates. As a result, some metrics and network relationships displayed in Rankless may not fully capture the entirety of a scholar's output or impact.

Explore authors with similar magnitude of impact