Bibliometric analysis maps expanding investigations of the vitamin D receptor in oncology, highlighting emerging frontiers in immunotherapy and metabolic signaling.
The vitamin D receptor (VDR) plays a critical role in cancer biology, regulating cell proliferation, differentiation, and immune responses. Despite growing research interest, no systematic bibliometric analysis has mapped the global landscape of VDR-related cancer research. This study analyzed 2,567 publications on VDR and cancer from 2003 to 2025 using the Web of Science Core Collection. Visualization and analysis were performed using VOSviewer (version 1.6.20), CiteSpace (version 6.4.R1), the biblioshiny R package (version 5.1.0), and SciExplorer (online platform). The analysis included 69 countries, 1,952 institutions, and 11,771 authors. The USA leads with 748 publications, followed by China (382). Harvard University is the most influential institution (45 publications). Journal of Biological Chemistry ranks first in co-citations (4,667), while Journal of Steroid Biochemistry and Molecular Biology publishes the most articles (66). Sun J is the most prolific author (30 articles). Keyword clustering identifies seven research hotspots: breast cancer cell, receptor gene polymorphism, cardiovascular disease, nuclear receptor, pancreatic cancer, colon cancer, and predisposition. Burst detection reveals “d deficiency” (strength 10.67), “farnesoid X receptor” (8.79), and “oxidative stress” (2018–2025) as emerging frontiers. Research foci include VDR signaling mechanisms, gene polymorphisms, inflammation, and FXR-VDR metabolic axis. VDR-cancer research has matured into an interdisciplinary field bridging molecular mechanisms and clinical translation. Future directions emphasize genotype-guided prevention, VDR-based combination immunotherapy, and precision medicine approaches integrating multi-omics biomarkers.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zou et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: