of Oncology is comprehensive oncology journal publishing
articles in the fields of clinical and experimental
oncology, cancer epidemiology, prevention, social
and ethical aspects of cancer.
Archive of Oncology publish reviews on topics in oncology
and considers original research contributions that
advocate change in or illuminate oncological clinical
practice. The journal publish manuscripts from all
aspects of medical, surgical, radiation and experimental
oncology, and covers topics on the mechanism, cause,
and treatment of cancer including environmental and
genetic risk factors and cellular and molecular carcinogenesis.
Authors warrant that their manuscripts are their original
works, that they have not been published before, and
are not under consideration for publication elsewhere.
Parallel submission of the same paper to another journal
constitutes misconduct and eliminates the manuscript
from further consideration. The work that has already
been published elsewhere cannot be reprinted in the
Archive of Oncology.
Authors are exclusively responsible for the contents
of their submissions. Authors affirm that the article
contains no unfounded or unlawful statements and does
not violate the rights of third parties.
Authors must make sure that their author team listed
in the manuscript includes all and only those authors
who have significantly contributed to the submitted
manuscript. If persons other than authors were involved
in important aspects of the research project and the
preparation of the manuscript, their contribution
should be acknowledged in a footnote or the Acknowledgments
It is the responsibility of the authors to specify
the title and code label of the research project within
which the work was created, as well as the full title
of the funding institution. In case a submitted manuscript
has been presented at a conference in the form of
an oral presentation (under the same or similar title),
detailed information about the conference shall be
provided in the same place.
Authors are required to properly cite sources that
have significantly influenced their research and their
manuscript. Parts of the manuscript, including text,
equations, pictures and tables that are taken verbatim
from other works must be clearly marked, e.g. by quotation
marks accompanied by their location in the original
document (page number), or, if more extensive, given
in a separate paragraph.
Full references of each quotation (in-text citation)
must be listed in the separate section (Literature
or References) in a uniform manner, according to the
citation style used by the journal. References section
should list only quoted/cited, and not all sources
used for the preparation of a manuscript.
When authors discover a significant error or inaccuracy
in their own published work, it is their obligation
to promptly notify the Editor-in-Chief (or publisher)
and cooperate with him/her to retract or correct the
Authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial
or other substantive conflict of interest that might
have influenced the presented results or their interpretation.
By submitting a manuscript the authors agree to abide
by the Editorial Policies of Archive of Oncology.
The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for deciding which
articles submitted to the journal will be published.
The decisions are made based exclusively on the manuscript's
merit. They must be free from any racial, gender,
sexual, religious, ethnic, or political bias. When
making decisions the Editor-in-Chief is also guided
by the editorial policy and legal provisions relating
to defamation, copyright infringement and plagiarism.
Members of the Editorial Board including the Editor-in-Chief
must hold no conflict of interest with regard to the
articles they consider for publication. Members who
feel they might be perceived as being involved in
such a conflict do not participate in the decision
process for a particular manuscript.
The information and ideas presented in submitted manuscripts
shall be kept confidential. Information and ideas
contained in unpublished materials must not be used
for personal gain without the written consent of the
Editors and the editorial staff shall take all reasonable
measures to ensure that the authors/reviewers remain
anonymous during and after the evaluation process
in accordance with the type of reviewing in use.
The Editorial Board is obliged to assist reviewers
with additional information on the manuscript, including
the results of checking manuscript for plagiarism.
Reviewers are required to provide the qualified and
timely assessment of the scholarly merits of the manuscript.
The reviewer takes special care of the real contribution
and originality of the manuscript. The review must
be fully objective. The judgment of the reviewers
must be clear and substantiated by arguments.
The reviewers assess manuscript for the compliance
with the profile of the journal, the relevance of
the investigated topic and applied methods, the scientific
relevance of information presented in the manuscript,
the presentation style and scholarly apparatus. The
review has a standard format. It is submitted through
the online journal management system where it is stored
The reviewer must not be in a conflict of interest
with the authors or funders of research. If such a
conflict exists, the reviewer is obliged to promptly
notify the Editor-in-Chief. The reviewer shall not
accept for reviewing papers beyond the field of his/her
Reviewers should alert the Editor-in-Chief to any
well-founded suspicions or the knowledge of possible
violations of ethical standards by the authors. Reviewers
should recognize relevant published works that have
not been considered in the manuscript. They may recommend
specific references for citation, but shall not require
citing papers published in Archive of Oncology, or
their own papers, unless it is justified.
The reviewers are expected to improve the quality
of the manuscript through their suggestions. If they
recommend correction of the manuscript prior to publication,
they are obliged to specify the manner in which this
can be achieved.
Any manuscripts received for review must be treated
as confidential documents. Reviewers must not use
unpublished materials disclosed in submitted manuscripts
without the express written consent of the authors.
PEER REVIEW PROCESS
Archive of Oncology uses double-blind review
system. Each manuscript is reviewed by at least two
reviewers. The reviewers act independently and they
are not aware of each other's identities. The reviewers
are selected solely according to whether they have
the relevant expertise for evaluating a manuscript.
They must not be from the same institution as the
author(s) of the manuscript, nor be their co-authors
in the recent past. No suggestions of individual reviewers
by the author(s) of the manuscript will be accepted.
The purpose of peer review is to assists the Editorial
Board in making decision of whether to accept or reject
a paper. The purpose is also to assist the author
in improving papers.
Peer review process
Manuscripts are sent for review only if they pass
the initial evaluation regarding their form and thematic
scope. A special care is taken that the initial evaluation
does not last more than necessary.
Under normal circumstances, the review process takes
up to eight weeks. The total period from the
submission of a manuscript until its publication takes
an average of 70 days.
During the review process the Editor-in-Chief may
require authors to provide additional information
(including raw data) if they are necessary for the
evaluation of the manuscript. These materials will
be kept confidential and will not be used for any
The entire review process takes place under the supervision
of the Editor-in-Chief in an online environment, within
Assistant, a system based on the Open Journal
System platform. The system also allows authors to
track the entire process of reviewing the manuscript.
In the case that the authors have serious and reasonable
objections to the reviews, the Editorial Board makes
an assessment of whether a review is objective and
whether it meets academic standards. If there is a
doubt about the objectivity or quality of review,
the Editor-in-Chief will assign additional reviewer(s).
Additional reviewers may also be assigned when reviewers'
decisions (accept or reject) are contrary to each
other or otherwise substantially incompatible.
The final decision on the acceptance of the manuscript
for publication rests solely with the Editor-in-Chief.
All papers published in Archive of Oncology are routinely
submitted to plagiarism detection through CrossCheck/iThenticate
is the only anti-plagiarism tool regarded to be sufficiently
efficient for use in journal publishing. In iThenticate,
plagiarized text is detected by matching the screened
article with a huge corpus of international scholarly
literature exclusively provided by CrossRef. In addition,
the corpus comprises research content available on
Based on the results of detection, the Editorial Board
decides whether a submitted article with a substantial
plagiarism score should be rejected or, as it happens
in some cases, returned to the authors for correction,
e.g. to add the missing citations. In making decisions,
the Editorial Board follows the standards set by Committee
on Publication Ethics (COPE). When using iThenticate
and resolving special cases, it relies on support
as the SCIndeks Assistant provider and the CrossRef
Papers published in Archive of Oncology are automatically
added to iThenticate's document corpus in order to
protect them from being plagiarized.
Archive of Oncology does not publish plagiarised papers.
The Editorial Board has adopted the stance that plagiarism,
where someone assumes another's ideas, words, or other
creative expression as one's own, is a clear violation
of scientific ethics. Plagiarism may also involve
a violation of copyright law, punishable by legal
Plagiarism includes the following:
- Verbatim (word for word), or almost verbatim copying,
or purposely paraphrasing portions of another author's
work without clearly indicating the source or marking
the copied fragment (for example, using quotation
marks) in a way described under Authors' responsibilities;
- Copying equations, figures or tables from someone
else's paper without properly citing the source and/or
without permission from the original author or the
Any manuscript which shows obvious signs of plagiarism
will be automatically rejected. In case plagiarism
is discovered in a paper that has already been published
by the journal, it will be retracted in accordance
with the procedure described under Retraction policy.
To prevent plagiarism the manuscripts are submitted
to a plagiarism detection process using iThenticate/CrossRef
within SCIndeks Assistant. The results obtained are
verified by the Editorial Board in accordance with
the guidelines and recommendations of the Committee
on Publication Ethics (COPE).
Anyone may inform the Editor-in-Chief / Editorial
Board at any time of suspected unethical behaviour
or any type of misconduct by giving the necessary
credible information/evidence to start an investigation.
Editor-in-Chief makes the decision regarding the initiation
of an investigation.During an investigation, any evidence
should be treated as confidential and only made available
to those strictly involved in the process.The accused
will always be given the chance to respond to any
charges made against them.If it is judged at the end
of the investigation that misconduct has occurred,
then it will be classified as either minor or serious.
Minor misconduct (with no influence on the integrity
of the paper and the journal, for example, when it
comes to misunderstanding or wrong application of
publishing standards) will be dealt directly with
authors and reviewers without involving any other
parties. Outcomes include:
- Sending a warning letter to authors and/or reviewers.
- Publishing correction of a paper, e.g. when sources
properly quoted in the text are omitted from the reference
- Publishing an erratum, e.g. if the error was made
by editorial staff.
In the case of major misconduct the Editor-in-Chief
/ Editorial Board may adopt different measures:
- Publication of a formal announcement or editorial
describing the misconduct.
- Informing officially the author's/reviewers affiliating
- The formal, announced retraction of publications
from the journal in accordance with the Retraction
- A ban on submissions from an individual for a defined
- Referring a case to a professional organization
or legal authority for further investigation and action.
The above actions may be taken separately or jointly.
If necessary, in the process of resolving the case
relevant expert organizations, bodies, or individuals
may be consulted.
When dealing with unethical behaviour, the Editorial
Board will rely on the guidelines and recommendations
provided by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
Legal limitations of the publisher, copyright holder
or author(s), infringements of professional ethical
codes, such as multiple submissions, bogus claims
of authorship, plagiarism, fraudulent use of data
or any major misconduct require retraction of an article.
Occasionally a retraction can be used to correct numerous
serious errors, which cannot be covered by publishing
corrections. A retraction may be published by the
Editor-in-Chief / Editorial Board, the author(s),
or both parties consensually.
The retraction takes the form of a separate item listed
in the contents and labelled as "Retraction".
In SCIndeks, as the journals' primary full-text database,
a two-way communication (HTML link) between the original
work and the retraction is established. The original
article is retained unchanged, except for a watermark
on the PDF indicating on each page that it is "retracted".
Retractions are published according to the requirements
of COPE operationalized by CEON/CEES as the journal
indexer and aggregator.