OPINION article
Front. Oncol.
Sec. Breast Cancer
Commentary: Evolution and hotspots in breast cancer organoid research: insights from a bibliometric and visual knowledge mapping study (2005-2024)
Provisionally accepted
- Gong'an Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Affiliated Hospital of Hubei University of Chinese Medicine, Wuhan, China
Select one of your emails
You have multiple emails registered with Frontiers:
Notify me on publication
Please enter your email address:
If you already have an account, please login
You don't have a Frontiers account ? You can register here
In recent years, the exponential growth in biomedical literature has garnered significant attention for bibliometrics as a method capable of quantitatively and qualitatively analyzing research trends and hotspots within a given discipline. We read with great interest the publication by Tao Wu et al(1). titled "Evolution and hotspots in breast cancer organoid research: insights from a bibliometric and visual knowledge mapping study (2005)(2006)(2007)(2008)(2009)(2010)(2011)(2012)(2013)(2014)(2015)(2016)(2017)(2018)(2019)(2020)(2021)(2022)(2023)(2024)," which was published in the issue of Frontiers in Oncology. We highly support and appreciate the researchers' work and thank them for their contributions in the field. By using three bibliometric tools (VOSviewer, R-bibliometrix, and CiteSpace), this study conducted 28 an in-depth analysis of the dynamic evolution of breast cancer organoid research over the past two 29 decades. The finding provided a thorough summary of the major achievements, persistent challenges, 30 and future frontiers within this rapidly advancing field. Key achievements encompass the successful 31 implementation of patient-derived organoids (PDOs) for personalized drug testing and disease 32 modeling, significant progress in recapitulating the tumor microenvironment and immune 33 interactions, and the integration of innovative 3D bioprinting and engineering approaches. However, 34 we identified several points requiring clarification and correction. First, regarding the 'Countries/regions and institutions analysis' section: The text states: "the United 36 States (666), China (257), India (106), the United Kingdom (105) and Germany (101) contributed the 37 most." However, the data presented in Table 1 clearly indicate that Italy has 106 publications, not 38 India. Consequently, the subsequent statement, "the United Kingdom, Germany and the United States 39 have higher citation rates than China and India," should also be corrected by replacing "India" with
Keywords: 3Dbioprinting, Bibliometrics, breast cancer, Drug Discovery, Organoids, Research hotspots, Tumor Microenvironment
Received: 19 Oct 2025; Accepted: 19 Dec 2025.
Copyright: © 2025 Zhao, Luo and Zhang. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
* Correspondence: Hua Zhao
Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.