cells-logo

Journal Browser

Journal Browser

Announcements

4 March 2026
MDPI’s 2025 Best Paper Awards—Award-Winning Papers Announced


MDPI is honored to announce the recipients of the 2025 Best Paper Awards, celebrating exceptional research for its scientific merit and broad impact. After a rigorous evaluation process conducted by Academic Editors, this year’s awards showcase papers that stand out for their innovation, relevance, and high-quality presentation.

Out of a highly competitive pool, 396 winning papers have been recognized for their exceptional contributions. We congratulate these authors for pushing the boundaries of their respective disciplines.

At MDPI, we are dedicated to broadening the reach of innovative science. To learn more about the award-winning papers and explore research projects in your field of study, please visit the following links:

About MDPI Awards:

To reward the global research community and enhance academic dialogue, MDPI journals regularly host award programs across diverse scientific disciplines. These awards, serving as a source of inspiration and recognition, help raise the influence of talented individuals who have been credited with outstanding achievements and whose work drives the advancement of their fields.

Explore the Best Paper Awards open for participation, please click here.

 

6 November 2025
MDPI Launches the Michele Parrinello Award for Pioneering Contributions in Computational Physical Science


MDPI is delighted to announce the establishment of the Michele Parrinello Award. Named in honor of Professor Michele Parrinello, the award celebrates his exceptional contributions and his profound impact on the field of computational physical science research.

The award will be presented biennially to distinguished scientists who have made outstanding achievements and contributions in the field of computational physical science—spanning physics, chemistry, and materials science.


About Professor Michele Parrinello

"Do not be afraid of new things. I see it many times when we discuss a new thing that young people are scared to go against the mainstream a little bit, thinking what is going to happen to me and so on. Be confident that what you do is meaningful, and do not be afraid, do not listen too much to what other people have to say.”

——Professor Michele Parrinello

Born in Messina in 1945, he received his degree from the University of Bologna and is currently affiliated with the Italian Institute of Technology. Professor Parrinello is known for his many technical innovations in the field of atomistic simulations and for a wealth of interdisciplinary applications ranging from materials science to chemistry and biology. Together with Roberto Car, he introduced ab initio molecular dynamics, also known as the Car–Parrinello method, marking the beginning of a new era both in the area of electronic structure calculations and in molecular dynamics simulations. He is also known for the Parrinello–Rahman method, which allows crystalline phase transitions to be studied by molecular dynamics. More recently, he has introduced metadynamics for the study of rare events and the calculation of free energies.

For his work, he has been awarded many prizes and honorary degrees. He is a member of numerous academies and learned societies, including the German Berlin-Brandenburgische Akademie der Wissenschaften, the British Royal Society, and the Italian Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei, which is the major academy in his home country of Italy.


Award Committee

The award committee will be chaired by Professor Xin-Gao Gong, a computational condensed matter physicist, academician of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, and professor at the Department of Physics, Fudan University. Professor Xin-Gao Gong will lead a panel of several senior experts in the field to oversee the evaluation and selection process.

The Institute for Computational Physical Sciences at Fudan University (Shanghai, China), led by Professor Xin-Gao Gong, will serve as the supporting institute for the award.

"We hope the Michele Parrinello Award will recognize scientists who have made significant contributions to the field of computational condensed matter physics and at the same time set a benchmark for the younger generation, providing clear direction for their pursuit—this is precisely the original intention behind establishing the award."

——Professor Xin-Gao Gong

The first edition of the award was officially launched on 1 November 2025. Nominations will be accepted before the end of March 2026. For further details, please visit mparrinelloaward.org.


About the MDPI Sustainability Foundation and MDPI Awards

The Michele Parrinello Award is part of the MDPI Sustainability Foundation, which is dedicated to advancing sustainable development through scientific progress and global collaboration. The foundation also oversees the World Sustainability Award, the Emerging Sustainability Leader Award, and the Tu Youyou Award. The establishment of the Michele Parrinello Award will further enrich the existing award portfolio, providing continued and diversified financial support to outstanding professionals across various fields. 

In addition to these foundation-level awards, MDPI journals also recognize outstanding contributions through a range of honors, including Best Paper Awards, Outstanding Reviewer Awards, Young Investigator Awards, Travel Awards, Best PhD Thesis Awards, Editor of Distinction Awards, and others. These initiatives aim to recognize excellence across disciplines and career stages, contributing to the long-term vitality and sustainability of scientific research.

Find more information on awards here.

25 March 2026
Acknowledging the Contributions of Our Reviewers in 2025


As a pioneer in open access publishing, MDPI maintains rigorous publication standards. This mission relies on the dedication and expertise of our reviewers, who invest their time and knowledge to ensure the quality and integrity of the research we publish.

In 2025, over 209,000 reviewers contributed to the peer-review process at MDPI, providing more than 1.3 million review reports for our journals. To express our gratitude, MDPI’s Reviewer Recognition Program highlights reviewers across over 400 journals, featuring those who have assessed at least one manuscript and agreed to be acknowledged.

In addition, MDPI has identified its Top 1000 Reviewers of 2024 to recognize those whose expertise, dedication, and thoughtful evaluations were particularly outstanding.

Many journals have also established Outstanding Reviewer Awards to honor our reviewers’ commitment to publication excellence. Together with the Exceptional Reviewer List, we showcase the importance of reviewers’ work and their time and dedication.

These initiatives serve to express our deepest appreciation and gratitude towards the whole reviewer community. In recognition of their contributions, we also welcome new researchers to join this community. If you would like to contribute to open access publishing, learn more about the reviewers’ benefits and sign up to join us.

24 March 2026
Cells | Top 15 Viewed Articles in 2025


Cells (ISSN: 2073-4409) is an international, peer-reviewed, open access journal on cell biology, molecular biology, and biophysics, published semimonthly online by MDPI.

All the articles published in our journal are in an open access format, granting our readers free and unlimited access to the full text. We welcome you to read the most viewed articles published in 2025, listed below.

  1. “Impact of a High-Fat Diet on the Gut Microbiome: A Comprehensive Study of Microbial and Metabolite Shifts During Obesity”
    by Md Abdullah Al Mamun, Ahmed Rakib, Mousumi Mandal and Udai P. Singh
    Cells 2025, 14(6), 463; https://doi.org/10.3390/cells14060463
    Available online: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4409/14/6/463
  2. “The Combination of Neurotropic Vitamins B1, B6, and B12 Enhances Neural Cell Maturation and Connectivity Superior to Single B Vitamins”
    by Oscar Cuyubamba, Camila Pereira Braga, Dionne Swift, John T. Stickney and Christian Viel
    Cells 2025, 14(7), 477; https://doi.org/10.3390/cells14070477
    Available online: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4409/14/7/477
  3. “Mebendazole Exerts Anticancer Activity in Ovarian Cancer Cell Lines via Novel Girdin-Mediated AKT/IKKα/β/NF-κB Signaling Axis”
    by Rahul Gupta, Dipanjan Roy, Arijit Ghosh, Yasmin Begum, Dipanjan Ghosh and Snehasikta Swarnakar
    Cells 2025, 14(2), 113; https://doi.org/10.3390/cells14020113
    Available online: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4409/14/2/113
  4. “Inhibition of the Prostaglandin-degrading Enzyme 15-PGDH Ameliorates Mash-associated Apoptosis and Fibrosis in Mice”
    by Utibe-Abasi S. Udoh, Mathew Steven Schade, Jacqueline A. Sanabria, Pradeep Kumar Rajan, Rodrigo Aguilar, Micheal Andryka, Alexei Gorka, Sandrine V. Pierre and Juan Sanabria
    Cells 2025, 14(13), 987; https://doi.org/10.3390/cells14130987
    Available online: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4409/14/13/987
  5. “Taurine Prevents Impairments in Skin Barrier Function and Dermal Collagen Synthesis Triggered by Sleep Deprivation-Induced Estrogen Circadian Rhythm Disruption”
    by Qi Shao, Zhaoyang Wang, Yifang Li, Xun Tang, Ziyi Li, Huan Xia, Qihong Wu, Ruxue Chang, Chunna Wu, Tao Meng et al.
    Cells 2025, 14(10), 727; https://doi.org/10.3390/cells14100727
    Available online: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4409/14/10/727
  6. “One Month of Brief Weekly Magnetic Field Therapy Enhances the Anticancer Potential of Female Human Sera: Randomized Double-Blind Pilot Study”
    by Jan Nikolas Iversen, Yee Kit Tai, Jasmine Lye Yee Yap, Rafhanah Banu Binte Abdul Razar, Viresh Krishnan Sukumar, Kwan Yu Wu, Melissa Gaik-Ming Ooi, Marek Kukumberg, Sabrina Adam, Abdul Jalil Rufaihah et al.
    Cells 2025, 14(5), 331; https://doi.org/10.3390/cells14050331
    Available online: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4409/14/5/331
  7. “Male-Dominant Spinal Microglia Contribute to Neuropathic Pain by Producing CC-Chemokine Ligand 4 Following Peripheral Nerve Injury”
    by Fumihiro Saika, Tetsuya Sato, Takeru Nakabayashi, Yohji Fukazawa, Shinjiro Hino, Kentaro Suzuki and Norikazu Kiguchi
    Cells 2025, 14(7), 484; https://doi.org/10.3390/cells14070484
    Available online: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4409/14/7/484
  8. “810-nm Photobiomodulation Evokes Glutamate Release in Normal and Rotenone-Dysfunctional Cortical Nerve Terminals by Modulating Mitochondrial Energy Metabolism”
    by Silvia Ravera, Elisa Farsetti, Guido Maura, Manuela Marcoli, Matteo Bozzo, Chiara Cervetto and Andrea Amaroli
    Cells 2025, 14(2), 67; https://doi.org/10.3390/cells14020067
    Available online: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4409/14/2/67
  9. “Genetic and Molecular Characterization of H9c2 Rat Myoblast Cell Line”
    by Thomas Liehr, Stefanie Kankel, Katharina S. Hardt, Eva M. Buhl, Heidi Noels, Diandra T. Keller, Sarah K. Schröder-Lange and Ralf Weiskirchen
    Cells 2025, 14(7), 502; https://doi.org/10.3390/cells14070502
    Available online: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4409/14/7/502
  10. “Epimedium-Derived Exosome-Loaded GelMA Hydrogel Enhances MC3T3-E1 Osteogenesis via PI3K/Akt Pathway”
    by Weijian Hu, Xin Xie and Jiabin Xu
    Cells 2025, 14(15), 1214; https://doi.org/10.3390/cells14151214
    Available online: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4409/14/15/1214
  11. “Effects of Microplastic Accumulation on Neuronal Death After Global Cerebral Ischemia”
    by Dong Yeon Kim, Min Kyu Park, Hyun Wook Yang, Seo Young Woo, Hyun Ho Jung, Dae-Soon Son, Bo Young Choi and Sang Won Suh
    Cells 2025, 14(4), 241; https://doi.org/10.3390/cells14040241
    Available online: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4409/14/4/241
  12. “In Vitro Inhibition of Endoplasmic Reticulum Stress: A Promising Therapeutic Strategy for Patients with Crohn’s Disease”
    by Bruno Lima Rodrigues, Lívia Bitencourt Pascoal, Lívia Moreira Genaro, Leonardo Saint Clair Assad Warrak, Beatriz Alves Guerra Rodrigues, Andressa Coope, Michel Gardere Camargo, Priscilla de Sene Portel Oliveira, Maria de Lourdes Setsuko Ayrizono, Lício Augusto Velloso et al.
    Cells 2025, 14(4), 270; https://doi.org/10.3390/cells14040270
    Available online: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4409/14/4/270
  13. “Traumatic Brain Injury Promotes Neurogenesis and Oligodendrogenesis in Subcortical Brain Regions of Mice”
    by Olga Astakhova, Anna Ivanova, Ilia Komoltsev, Natalia Gulyaeva, Grigori Enikolopov and Alexander Lazutkin
    Cells 2025, 14(2), 92; https://doi.org/10.3390/cells14020092
    Available online: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4409/14/2/92
  14. “Advanced Paternal Age and Sperm Proteome Dynamics: A Possible Explanation for Age-Associated Male Fertility Decline”
    by Joana Santiago, Joana V. Silva, Manuel A. S. Santos and Margarida Fardilha
    Cells 2025, 14(11), 813; https://doi.org/10.3390/cells14110813
    Available online: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4409/14/11/813
  15. “Development of SNAP-Tag Based Nanobodies as Secondary Antibody Mimics for Indirect Immunofluorescence Assays”
    by Wenjie Sheng, Chaoyu Zhang, T. M. Mohiuddin, Marwah Al-Rawe, Roland Schmitz, Marcus Niebert, Lutz Konrad, Steffen Wagner, Felix Zeppernick, Ivo Meinhold-Heerlein et al.
    Cells 2025, 14(10), 691; https://doi.org/10.3390/cells14100691
    Available online: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4409/14/10/691

16 March 2026
Cells | Selected Papers on Checkpoint Inhibition Published in 2024–2025


We are pleased to highlight eight interesting papers on immune checkpoint inhibitors published in Cells (ISSN: 2073-4409) in 2024 and 2025. These papers provide important insights into immune checkpoint inhibitors, covering immunomodulation, signaling pathways, immunotherapy, and both classical and novel targets. We welcome you to explore these contributions, which reflect recent advances and emerging directions in checkpoint inhibition.

1. “Cancer Vulnerabilities Through Targeting the ATR/Chk1 and ATM/Chk2 Axes in the Context of DNA Damage”
by Anell Fernandez, Maider Artola, Sergio Leon, Nerea Otegui, Aroa Jimeno, Diego Serrano and Alfonso Calvo
Cells 2025, 14(10), 748; https://doi.org/10.3390/cells14100748
Full text available online: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4409/14/10/748

2. “B7H3 in Gastrointestinal Tumors: Role in Immune Modulation and Cancer Progression: A Review of the Literature”
by Sylwia Mielcarska, Anna Kot, Agnieszka Kula, Miriam Dawidowicz, Piotr Sobków, Daria Kłaczka, Dariusz Waniczek and Elżbieta Świętochowska
Cells 2025, 14(7), 530; https://doi.org/10.3390/cells14070530
Full text available online: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4409/14/7/530

3. “Exploiting Cancer Dormancy Signaling Mechanisms in Epithelial Ovarian Cancer Through Spheroid and Organoid Analysis”
by Emily J. Tomas, Yudith Ramos Valdes, Jennifer Davis, Bart Kolendowski, Adrian Buensuceso, Gabriel E. DiMattia and Trevor G. Shepherd
Cells 2025, 14(2), 133; https://doi.org/10.3390/cells14020133
Full text available online: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4409/14/2/133

4. “B-Cell Lymphomas Secrete Novel Inhibitory Molecules That Disrupt HLA Class II-Mediated CD4+ T-Cell Recognition”
by Jason M. God, Shereen Amria, Christine A. Cameron, Lixia Zhang, Jennifer R. Bethard and Azizul Haque
Cells 2025, 14(15), 1220; https://doi.org/10.3390/cells14151220
Full text available online: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4409/14/15/1220

5. “Transcriptomic Analyses of Ovarian Clear Cell Carcinoma Spheroids Reveal Distinct Proliferative Phenotypes and Therapeutic Vulnerabilities”
by Bart Kolendowski, Sylvia Cheng, Yudith Ramos Valdes, Trevor G. Shepherd and Gabriel E. DiMattia
Cells 2025, 14(11), 785; https://doi.org/10.3390/cells14110785
Full text available online: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4409/14/11/785

6. “Dihydroorotate Dehydrogenase in Mitochondrial Ferroptosis and Cancer Therapy”
by Jaewang Lee and Jong-Lyel Roh
Cells 2025, 14(23), 1889; https://doi.org/10.3390/cells14231889
Full text available online: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4409/14/23/1889

7. “Chronic High-Salt Diet Activates Tumor-Initiating Stem Cells Leading to Breast Cancer Proliferation”
by Lisa Tucker, Umer Ali, Roy Zent, Deborah A. Lannigan, Jeffrey C. Rathmell and Venkataswarup Tiriveedhi
Cells 2024, 13(11), 912; https://doi.org/10.3390/cells13110912
Full text available online: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4409/13/11/912

8. “Specific Cell Targeting by Toxoplasma gondii Displaying Functional Single-Chain Variable Fragment as a Novel Strategy; A Proof of Principle”
by Muna Aljieli, Clément Rivière, Louis Lantier, Nathalie Moiré, Zineb Lakhrif, Anne-France Boussemart, Thomas Cnudde, Laurie Lajoie, Nicolas Aubrey, Elhadi M. Ahmed et al.
Cells 2024, 13(11), 975; https://doi.org/10.3390/cells13110975
Full text available online: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4409/13/11/975

12 March 2026
Interview with Dr. Wei-Wei Lim—Cells Exceptional Reviewer 2025


We are pleased to share an interview with Dr. Wei-Wei Lim, who has been recognized as a Cells Exceptional Reviewer 2025.

In this interview, Dr. Lim reflects on her experience collaborating with Cells (ISSN: 2073-4409) and MDPI, discusses the benefits of open access publishing, and shares her perspective on the peer review process. She also offers valuable insights into what reviewers look for in high-quality manuscripts and provides advice for early career researchers interested in becoming reviewers.

We warmly invite you to read the full interview and learn more about Dr. Lim’s perspectives on peer review and scientific publishing.

1. Can you briefly describe your academic background and research interests?
I have a PhD and consider myself a translational rather than a basic scientist. My main research focus is on cardiovascular diseases involving inflammation, cytokines, and cell biology. I also work on cardiac dysrhythmias, cardiomyopathies, and vascular biology, mostly by using preclinical cellular and animal models. I’m a current senior research fellow at the National Heart Centre Singapore and a research assistant professor at Duke-NUS Medical School.

2. In your opinion, what is the biggest advantage of open access publishing?
I think the biggest advantage of open access publishing is accessibility. It benefits both authors and readers by removing paywalls, making it easier to access research, data, and updates on current studies. It also speeds up the process from submission to publication, allowing others in the field to engage sooner and help accelerate scientific progress.

3. You first collaborated with our journal in 2022. How would you describe your experience with Cells and MDPI so far?
My first experience with the journal was in 2022, as a co-author. Overall, I’ve found the process across MDPI journals to be consistent; the peer review pathways are quite similar. One clear advantage is the much faster turnaround time compared to traditional journals.

4. What do you look for in a high-quality manuscript?
I pay close attention to figure quality, making sure units are correct and that the data aligns with established knowledge. I also look out for issues in data analysis or figure composition, like signs of improper copying and pasting. A strong abstract is also important: it should be concise and clearly summarize the research, as that’s often the section readers use to decide whether to read on. Most importantly, I assess whether the conclusions are actually supported by the data. If they’re not, that raises concerns. Overall, I believe the data and visuals should tell the story as clearly as possible.

5. How do you balance constructive criticism with encouragement in your reviews?
I try to remain unbiased in all my reviews. If I have concerns about the data, I support my feedback with references to relevant papers, so authors can see where I’m coming from. I always aim to be polite; criticism can be tough to receive, and my goal is to help improve the work, not just to point out flaws. I think that mindset is important for both reviewers and authors.

6. What do you think authors most commonly overlook during manuscript preparation?
One of the most common issues I see is authors not paying enough attention to their data, especially the underlying data. There’s a growing trend toward including more source material as supplementary files, which is good. But in early drafts, I often find incomplete data, such as mismatched sample sizes or error bars that don’t correspond with the graphs. These problems usually come from not thoroughly checking datasets before submission.

7. What advice would you give to early career researchers who are new to reviewing?
I strongly encourage early career researchers to get involved in peer review. It helps them understand what reviewers look for, which in turn improves their own writing and submissions. Because reviewing can be quite complex, I think mentorship from an experienced reviewer is really valuable. Jumping straight into reviewing after a PhD can be a big leap. But overall, I believe the peer review process is a great learning experience for those starting out.

8. How do you think peer review might evolve in the future, especially in open access publishing?
Looking ahead, I think peer review, particularly in the open access model, will involve more steps before acceptance. I also see artificial intelligence playing a larger role, especially in identifying AI-generated content like images and managing copyright. Transparency will likely be emphasized more, with raw data being made available through open repositories. In my field, I also expect to see more focus on including both sexes in animal models, to ensure the findings are applicable more broadly.

12 March 2026
Interview with Prof. Dr. Johannes Boltze—Cells Exceptional Reviewer 2025


We are pleased to share an interview with Prof. Dr. Johannes Boltze, who has been recognized as a Cells Exceptional Reviewer 2025.

In this interview, Prof. Boltze reflects on his experience collaborating with Cells (ISSN: 2073-4409) and MDPI, discusses the importance of transparency in scientific publishing, and shares his perspective on the peer review process. He also offers valuable insights into what makes a high-quality manuscript and provides advice for early-career researchers interested in becoming reviewers.

We warmly invite you to read the full interview and learn more about Prof. Boltze’s perspectives on peer review and scientific publishing.

1. Can you briefly describe your academic background and research interests?
I was originally trained as a physician, but I also hold a degree in neurobiology, along with doctoral degrees in both fields. My core research interests focus on cerebrovascular diseases, especially stroke and vascular dementia, with a particular emphasis on cerebral small vessel disease. I also have a background in the stem cell field.

2. In your opinion, what is the biggest advantage of open access publishing?
The greatest benefit of open access (OA) publishing is the unrestricted availability of published knowledge. While I recognize that it comes with considerable costs, I believe it's well worth it. Another major advantage is the transparency it offers.

3. You first collaborated with our journal in 2019. How would you describe your experience with Cells and MDPI so far?
My experience with Cells and MDPI has been very positive overall. The timelines can sometimes be a bit tight, but in most cases, it’s manageable. Communication has been efficient, and responses typically come within 48 hours. The peer review process is smooth and pleasant.

4. What do you look for in a high-quality manuscript?
For me, a strong manuscript includes both internal and external validity in original research, appropriate use of statistical methods, and models that closely reflect the condition being studied. I also look for detailed descriptions of experimental procedures to ensure reproducibility. Transparency is essential, particularly in data presentation. I prefer seeing individual data points rather than just bar charts. I also value when authors include raw data, such as full, uncropped Western blot images alongside the cropped ones. It’s an important step in confirming data integrity and ruling out any manipulation.

5. How do you balance constructive criticism with encouragement in your reviews?
I avoid rejecting a paper outright unless there's clear manipulation or exaggerated claims not supported by the data. I find that approach unhelpful. Instead, I aim to give thorough and constructive feedback, especially if the manuscript needs substantial improvement. That way, authors can genuinely enhance their work. I also try to be patient with language issues; poor language doesn't mean poor science, and language editing is available before publication. My reviews tend to be long and time-consuming, but I believe that detailed responses are essential, not just because I appreciate them as an author myself, but also because I see it as part of my duty as a reviewer.

6. What do you think authors most commonly overlook when preparing manuscripts?
There are a few recurring issues I’ve noticed. One is the misuse of statistical tests or error indicators, for instance, using the standard error of the mean instead of the standard deviation. Another is applying parametric tests without first checking for normal data distribution, which can increase the chance of false positives. These mistakes are so common that they’re often seen even in high-impact journals. Another common oversight is not including individual data points. While many minor errors can be caught and fixed during the review process, these particular issues often go unnoticed.

7. What advice would you give to early-career researchers new to peer reviewing?
I strongly encourage young researchers to participate in peer review. Once they start publishing their own work, they’ll understand the value of thoughtful feedback. It's important to approach each manuscript with a neutral and objective mindset, neither overly enthusiastic nor overly critical. Treating the review process as a learning opportunity is key, both for scientific insight and professional growth. Providing detailed feedback is crucial because it’s the only way authors can really benefit.

8. How do you think peer review might evolve in the future, especially in the context of open access publishing?
I think double-blind review processes should become more common in the future. Hiding authors’ identities from reviewers can help reduce bias and lead to a more objective evaluation. However, once a paper is accepted, revealing the reviewers’ identities could be a good step for added transparency. I believe this would encourage more constructive feedback. I'm also intrigued by the idea of post-publication review, possibly hosted online, where readers could leave comments and critiques after publication. That kind of model would motivate authors to uphold higher standards and could improve the overall quality of research, especially in cases where a paper may have initially undergone limited scrutiny.

9 March 2026
Cells | New Affiliation Agreement with the International Cell Death Society (ICDS)


We are pleased to announce that the International Cell Death Society (ICDS) and our journal Cells (ISSN: 2073-4409) have signed an affiliation agreement.

The International Cell Death Society (ICDS) promulgates research and clinical information on the broad topic of cell death, including apoptosis, autophagy, necrosis, necroptosis, and other variants. ICDS brings together researchers from varying backgrounds and countries to foster international cooperation and collaborations based on new and different ideas.

ICDS started as a club in 1995, based on the intellectual and personal compatibility of a group of researchers from very different backgrounds working in the New York metropolitan area.

The meetings that ICDS organises are their most important annual events. They serve as the most visible example of the society’s efforts to promote interaction and collaboration between scientists working in various subspecialty fields of apoptosis.

There is no comparable US-based society that formally recognises the need for such a rapidly growing area. For more information about ICDS, please visit their website at https://celldeath-apoptosis.org/.

As part of this affiliation, ICDS members will receive a discount on regular submissions to Cells. We look forward to a productive and inspiring collaboration!

4 March 2026
Cells | Issue Cover Articles in the Second Half of 2025


The articles below have been selected as the Cover Articles for Issues 13–24 of Volume 14 by the Editorial Office of Cells (ISSN: 2073-4409). These articles come from multiple fields within the scope of cell biology, and we hope they can provide insights and references for scholars in related fields.


1. “9-cis-Retinoic Acid Improves Disease Modelling in iPSC-Derived Liver Organoids”
by Dastjerd, Mina Kazemzadeh, Vincent Merens, Ayla Smout, Rebeca De Wolf, Christophe Chesné, Catherine Verfaillie, Stefaan Verhulst and Leo A. van Grunsven
Cells 2025, 14(13), 983; https://doi.org/10.3390/cells14130983
Available online: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4409/14/13/983


2. “A High-Throughput ImmunoHistoFluorescence (IHF) Method for Sub-Nuclear Protein Analysis in Tissue”
by Kezia Catharina Oxe, Kristoffer Staal Rohrberg, Ulrik Lassen and Dorthe Helena Larsen
Cells 2025, 14(14), 1109; https://doi.org/10.3390/cells14141109
Available online: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4409/14/14/1109


3. “Estradiol Downregulates MicroRNA-193a to Mediate Its Angiogenic Actions”
by Lisa Rigassi, Mirel Adrian Popa, Ruth Stiller, Brigitte Leeners, Marinella Rosselli and Raghvendra Krishna Dubey
Cells 2025, 14(15), 1134; https://doi.org/10.3390/cells14151134
Available online: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4409/14/15/1134


4. “Mitochondrial Reactive Oxygen Species Production in Vascular Dementia Following Experimental Diabetes”
by Ed Wilson Santos, Subika Khatoon, Yun-Min Zheng and Yong-Xiao Wang
Cells 2025, 14(16), 1260; https://doi.org/10.3390/cells14161260
Available online: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4409/14/16/1260


5. “Context-Dependent Modulation of Breast Cancer Cell E-Cadherin Expression, Mitogenesis, and Immuno-Sensitivity by Immortalized Human Mesenchymal Stem Cells In Vitro”
by Bei Dai, Neha Atale, Amanda M. Clark and Alan Wells
Cells 2025, 14(17), 1316; https://doi.org/10.3390/cells14171316
Available online: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4409/14/17/1316


6. “Trisomy 21 Disrupts Thyroid Hormones Signaling During Human iPSC-Derived Neural Differentiation In Vitro”
by Janaina Sena de Souza, Sandra Sanchez-Sanchez, Nicolas Amelinez-Robles, B. S. Guerra, Gisele Giannocco and Alysson R. Muotri
Cells 2025, 14(18), 1407; https://doi.org/10.3390/cells14181407
Available online: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4409/14/18/1407


7. “Mitochondrial ROS–ER Stress Axis Governs IL-10 Production in Neutrophils and Regulates Inflammation in Murine Chlamydia pneumoniae Lung Infection”
by Bin Chou, Kazunari Ishii, Yusuke Kurihara, Akinori Shimizu, Michinobu Yoshimura, Ryo Ozuru, Ryota Itoh, Atsuhiko Sakamoto and Kenji Hiromatsu
Cells 2025, 14(19), 1523; https://doi.org/10.3390/cells14191523
Available online: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4409/14/19/1523


8. “TRIC-A Facilitates Sarcoplasmic Reticulum–Mitochondrial Ca2+ Signaling Crosstalk in Cardiomyocytes”
by Ang Li, Xinyu Zhou, Ki Ho Park, Jianxun Yi, Xuejun Li, Jae-Kyun Ko, Yuchen Chen, Miyuki Nishi, Daiju Yamazaki, Hiroshi Takeshima et al.
Cells, 2025, 14(20), 1579; https://doi.org/10.3390/cells14201579
Available online: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4409/14/20/1579


9. “Glial Plasticity and Metabolic Stability After Knockdown of Astrocytic Cx43 in the Dorsal Vagal Complex”
by Manon Barbot, Bruno Lebrun, Rym Barbouche, Stéphanie Gaigé, Alain Tonetto, Anne Abysique and Jean-Denis Troadec
Cells 2025, 14(21), 1694; https://doi.org/10.3390/cells14211694
Available online: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4409/14/21/1694


10. “Epicardial Abnormalities and Mesenchymal/Hematopoietic Cell Expansion in Plakophilin 2-Null Mouse Embryonic Hearts”
by Mistura Dolapo Bolaji, Pia E. Hartmann, Eva Miriam Buhl, Robin M. W. Colpaert, Francesca Gasparella, Leon J. de Windt, Martina Calore, Rudolf E. Leube and Hoda Moazzen
Cells 2025, 14(22), 1751; https://doi.org/10.3390/cells14221751
Available online: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4409/14/22/1751


11. “Histone Deacetylase Inhibition Enhances AQP3 Levels in Human Corneal Epithelial Cells and Corneal Wound Healing in Normoglycemic and Diabetic Male Mice”
by Samuel Melnyk, Xiaowen Lu, Victoria Ronderos, Vivek Choudhary, Maribeth H. Johnson, Mitchell A. Watsky and Wendy B. Bollag
Cells 2025, 14(23), 1880; https://doi.org/10.3390/cells14231880
Available online: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4409/14/23/1880


12. “KRT6A and KRT17 Mark Distinct Stem Cell Populations in the Adult Palpebral Conjunctiva and Meibomian Gland”
by Xuming Zhu, Mingang Xu, David M. Owens and Sarah E. Millar
Cells 2025, 14(24), 1979; https://doi.org/10.3390/cells14241979
Available online: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4409/14/24/1979

28 February 2026
MDPI INSIGHTS: The CEO’s Letter #32 - MDPI China and Thailand, China Science Daily, 1,000 Partnerships, R2R

Welcome to the MDPI Insights: The CEO's Letter.

In these monthly letters, I will showcase two key aspects of our work at MDPI: our commitment to empowering researchers and our determination to facilitating open scientific exchange.


Opening Thoughts

Reflections from China: Year-End-Celebrations and Open Access Publishing

In February, I had the pleasure of joining over a thousand colleagues from our Tongzhou and Haidian offices at their end-of-year annual celebration in Beijing.

Spending time with our teams in China is also a powerful reminder of the scale and complexity of MDPI as a global organization. Our colleagues in Beijing, Wuhan, and across the country play a significant role in our day-to-day operations and long-term development. I’m grateful for the hospitality, collaboration, and commitment shown by our managers and teams in China, alongside colleagues worldwide, who have helped steadily build MDPI, brick by brick, over the years.

Below are some data on Open Access (OA) publishing in China and our collaboration in this important research market.

Open Access Publishing in China

China has been the world’s leading country in research and review article publication volume since 2019, exceeding one million publications in 2025. Over the past five years, the gap between China and the second-ranked country, the United States, has continued to widen.

In 2025:

  • 47% of China’s research output was published Open Access
  • Of those OA publications, 76% were Gold Open Access (approximately 382,930 articles)
  • The overall OA distribution remained stable compared with 2024, with Gold OA increasing by 1%

Over the past five years (2021–2025):

  • China published 4,398,050 research and review articles
  • Approximately 48% of this output was OA

According to Dimensions, when comparing the top 20 countries by publication volume (2021–2025):

  • China ranks 1st worldwide in publication volume
  • China ranks 9th in citation performance within this group (for comparison, the US ranks 2nd in publication volume and 10th in citation ranking)
  • Average citations per article: 12.51

Among the top 10 universities globally by publication volume, six are Chinese institutions, alongside Harvard University (USA), the University of São Paulo (Brazil), the University of Toronto (Canada), and the University of Oxford (UK).

MDPI and China

China is an important and long-standing part of MDPI’s global publishing ecosystem:

  • In 2025, MDPI was the largest fully Open Access publisher in China
  • MDPI published 22% of China’s Gold Open Access output (82,133 papers)
  • We received 290,999 submissions from China-affiliated authors and published 82,133 articles
  • There are 8,500+ active Editorial Board Members based in China
    • 64% (5,438) have an H-index above 26
  • MDPI works with:
    • 117 Editors-in-Chief
    • 103 Section Editors-in-Chief
  • 71 China-based institutions currently hold IOAP agreements with MDPI, seven of which rank among the top 10 Chinese institutions by publication volume

China's scale in research output means that the publishing platforms chosen by Chinese scholars will continue to influence the direction of scholarly publishing. At the same time, MDPI’s strength comes from its international collaboration, with colleagues, editors, reviewers, and authors working together across regions and disciplines.

Thank you to all our colleagues in China, and around the world, who support MDPI’s publishing activities across departments and help advance open access research every day.

Impactful Research

“Progress in open science is built through trust, dialogue, and relationships”

Behind the Scenes: A Conversation with China Science Daily

During my trip to Beijing, I also had the opportunity to visit China Science Daily and take part in an interview and broader exchange with their team in Beijing. Visits like this matter because progress in open science is built not only through platforms and infrastructure, but also through trust, dialogue, and relationships across research communities and regions.

China Science Daily: History Museum

As part of the visit, I was given a tour of their History Museum, which offers a thorough perspective on the evolution of China’s first science and technology newspaper, established in 1959. The exhibition highlights how the organization developed into a trusted institution connecting research with the public and policymakers. It was a helpful reminder that at the core of publishing is stewardship, credibility, and long-term public engagement with science.

An Open Exchange on Open Science

During the visit, I met with Dr. Zhao Yan, Editor-in-Chief of ScienceNet. We had an open and engaging conversation about MDPI’s role in Open Access, the evolution of open science globally, and the potential for more collaboration going forward. He especially appreciated the candid and personal nature of our exchange, noting that this kind of dialogue feels important in a landscape where trust and transparency matter.

Interview on Open Access

I also participated in an interview with Ms. Yan Jie, from the Online Media Center and Editor-in-Chief of ScienceNet, China Science Daily. Our discussion covered the growth of Open Access over the past 30 years, MDPI’s mission and values, academic integrity, collaboration with the Chinese research community, and MDPI’s own 30th anniversary milestone. It was a great opportunity to reflect on how open science has matured, and where shared responsibility across publishers, institutions, and researchers continues to matter most.

“Progress in open science is built by more than scale and infrastructure”

I’m sharing a few photos from the visit as a glimpse behind the scenes. The full interview will be published by China Science Daily in due course, and I look forward to sharing it when it is available.

More broadly, visits like this reinforce something I’ve always believed in: progress in open science is built not only through scale and infrastructure, but also through continued dialogue, mutual respect, collaboration, and a willingness to listen across regions and perspectives. That remains central to our work, especially as MDPI reflects on 30 years of publishing, built together.

Inside MDPI

Bangkok Visit: Growth, Partnership, and Local Impact

In February, I also had the opportunity to visit our Bangkok office for the second time in two years to support their local meetings and deliver a training session on how we present MDPI at a corporate level.

It’s easy to spend time with our colleagues in Thailand. From Editorial and Production to Conferences, Marketing, Design, and our Regional Journal Relations Specialist (RJRS), the team continues to grow in scale and professionalism. I’d also like to recognize our local management and admin teams, who have been steadily expanding our office and supporting more than 500 colleagues on the ground.

Academic Partnerships

During the visit, we met with the Engineering Department at King Mongkut’s Institute of Technology Ladkrabang (KMITL). Our discussion focused on the recent MDPI developments, Institutional Open Access Program (IOAP) opportunities, Author Publishing Workshops (APW), and the potential use of JAMS to support their institutional journal.

“MDPI is the third-largest OA publisher in Thailand”

We also shared insights into the growth of Open Access (OA) in Thailand and KMITL’s own publishing trends. These conversations matter because institutions are looking for sustainable ways to support their researchers. Our IOAP agreements are one simple example of how we can provide value in this area while maintaining accessibility for authors.

Thailand and MDPI: 2025 Snapshot

Our Bangkok office, officially launched in 2022, has been growing to support over 500 staff members while continuing to expand its engagement in scholar visits, workshops, and conference collaborations. As at 2025, Thailand submissions to MDPI have increased about 21% and publications by about 25%, maintaining a rejection rate close to the company average. MDPI is the third-largest OA publisher in Thailand, publishing 15% of all Gold OA output in 2025.

Representing MDPI Externally

During the visit, I delivered a training session on how we present MDPI at external events.

This session covered topics related to:

  • Our aim and guiding principles
  • High-level company milestones and Indexing facts and figures
  • Industry partnerships and collaborations
  • Market trends in OA and subscription publishing
  • Country-specific publishing data and collaborations with MDPI
  • Insights from our Voice of Community report

I find that while many colleagues are very familiar with the specific journal for which they have responsibility, fewer have visibility into the broader MDPI ecosystem and the company’s global positioning. These sessions help build alignment, confidence, and consistency in how we represent the company.

What stands out most is that MDPI’s growth is not abstract: it’s visible in the people, the partnerships, and the professionalism developing across our offices.

Coming Together for Science

1,000 Institutional Partners: A Milestone Built on Trust

This month, we reached an important milestone: more than 1,000 institutions worldwide are now part of MDPI’s Institutional Open Access Program (IOAP). On paper, that is a number. In practice, it represents trust.

This milestone symbolizes thousands of conversations with libraries and institutions. It stands for negotiations, renewals, consortium expansions, and, most importantly, relationships built over time. It reflects the work of colleagues across publishing, institutional partnerships, marketing, editorial, finance, and many other teams who contribute to making these agreements operational.

In 2025 alone, more than 61,300 research articles benefited from article processing charge (APC) discounts through IOAP agreements. Tens of thousands of authors were able to publish through a simplified and structured process. At the same time, institutional administrators gained clearer oversight and streamlined workflows.

Why IOAP Matters

When we launched IOAP, the objective was straightforward: to reduce barriers for researchers while supporting institutions in navigating the evolving OA landscape. Over the past decade, the research ecosystem has changed. Funder mandates, national policies, and Plan S–aligned requirements have accelerated the transition to OA.

Institutions need publishing partners who provide transparency, scalability, and operational efficiency. IOAP was designed to support that reality.

For colleagues who would like to better understand the program, this blog-post overview of MDPI’s IOAP provides additional context, including common questions around the transition to OA and how our institutional partnerships are structured.

“Institutions need publishing partners who provide transparency, scalability, and operational efficiency”

Recent Examples

Our agreements continue to evolve across regions:

These examples show that institutions seek structured, predictable models that support their researchers at scale.

Looking Ahead

Crossing the threshold of 1,000 partners tells us that institutions see MDPI not just as a publisher but as a reliable operational partner in advancing open science. This milestone is not a finish line. It is a reminder that the work continues.

Thank you to the entire IOAP team and to all colleagues who contributed to reaching this achievement.

P.S. You can read about this milestone across industry outlets, including STM Publishing News, ALPSP, Research Information, EurekAlert, Brightsurf, among others. You can also read about the coverage in Poland (e.g., media-room, bomega) Korea (newstap), and Romania (EduLike).

Closing Thoughts

Reflections from the Researcher to Reader Conference

During 24–25 February, I attended the 2026 Researcher to Reader Conference in London, UK. Leaders from across scholarly publishing, research infrastructure, libraries, and technology gathered to discuss AI and research integrity, peer review reform, metadata and infrastructure, community engagement, open research policy, and the evolving role of publishers in a rapidly shifting ecosystem.

The conversations were open and honest, and at times uncomfortable – exactly what we need at times. Below are a few reflections that stayed with me.

The Battle for Knowledge: What Becomes Accepted as ‘True’?

One recurring theme was not whether science evolves but whether our infrastructure is resilient enough to sustain trust at scale. Science does not promise certainty: it promises process. As publishing systems grow more complex and become more technologically mediated, the question is how intentionally we design, monitor, and strengthen that process.

Peer Review: Speed, Credentials, and Structural Loops

Researchers consistently call for faster peer review. At the same time, reviewer credentials are often tied to publication records. This creates a structural loop. Publishing history opens reviewing opportunities, reviewing strengthens credentials, and those without early access remain outside the cycle.

There is a need for us to reflect on how opportunity circulates within our systems: we should ask how we create more inclusive pathways for researchers globally to participate in peer review.

Community Engagement Workshop

One of the highlights of R2R was the workshop format, whereby small groups met repeatedly over two days and moved from ideas to tangible strategies.

I joined the Community Engagement workshop led by Lou Peck (CEO at The International Bunch) and Godwyns Onwuchekwa (Principal Consultant at Global Tapestry Consulting). We explored two deceptively simple questions: What is a community? and What does engagement truly mean?

“Engagement requires shared design and shared responsibility”

Too often, organizations equate communication with engagement. The framework discussed mapped a maturity spectrum – from enablement (broadcasting, informing and consulting) to true engagement (collaborating and co-creating).

It was a useful reminder of the fact that if we want trust and loyalty, engagement must go beyond announcements and surveys. It requires shared design and shared responsibility.

AI: Democratization or Digital Colonialism?

I especially enjoyed the thought-provoking presentation from Nikesh Gosalia (Chief Partnership Officer at Cactus Communications), which highlighted an uncomfortable reality:

  • 93% of AI-generated content is in English
  • Approximately 2% is in French
  • Approximately 2% is in German
  • More than 7,000 languages are represented in less than 5% of the content within large AI systems

The implications are profound. Is AI democratizing access to scholarly publishing (making it easier for researchers everywhere to participate in global knowledge production)? Or are we encoding colonialism at scale (entrenching linguistic and structural hierarchies, and making it harder for voices from the Global South to be heard)?

AI is already reshaping how research is created, reviewed, discovered, and shared. Its potential is enormous. But its impact depends not only on capability, but on governance, design, and intentionality. Publishers, funders, and researchers all share responsibility in shaping how these systems evolve.

Ethicality in practice (Lightening Talk)

It was also great to have our colleague Dr Miloš Čučulović (Head of Technology Innovation at MDPI) present MDPI’s Ethicality platform during a lightning talk.

“Technology alone is not the answer”

Ethicality embeds AI-driven checks directly into the submission workflow, supporting editors proactively rather than reacting after publication. As we scale, tools like this help balance trust, efficiency, and research integrity.

This goes back into the underlying theme of the conference that technology alone is not the answer. However, technology embedded thoughtfully within clear governance frameworks can strengthen confidence in the editorial process.

Final thought

The question is no longer whether technology will transform research infrastructure: it is already doing so. The real question is what role each of us will play in shaping that transformation deliberately, with structural maturity, inclusive governance, and engagement that moves from informing to co-creating.

Science needs to evolve, responsibly. And that responsibility extends not only to what we publish, but also to how the systems behind publication are designed. Some important topics to continue reflecting on both internally and within our broader community.

Stefan Tochev
Chief Executive Officer
MDPI AG

Back to TopTop