Editor Spotlight: Benjamin Benzon

Benjamin Benzon is an Assistant Professor with a PhD in cancer immunology, who teaches anatomy at the University of Split, Croatia. His research primarily focuses on cancer differentiation therapy and drug repurposing, including both basic and translational research approaches. He also provides support to colleagues with research design and data analysis, and is an active Academic Editor for PLOS One. In this interview, he discusses his research, views on open science, and experience collaborating with PLOS as a valued editor.

What most excites you about your research and the cancer field?

Two things that have kept me motivated and excited about the cancer research are helping patients and finding the essence of cancer. Twelve years ago, when I finished my internship as a young doctor I was thinking along the lines that each age or epoch in medicine has its leading problems. Until mid-20^th century most of the patients died from the infectious diseases, development of antibiotics along with the public health measures solved that problem in a quite fascinating manner. Nowadays, the leading causes of mortality are cardiovascular diseases and cancer. When it comes to treatment options, patients with heart and blood vessels diseases are in a much better position than the patients with metastatic cancer, since todays cancer therapies can cure only few types of cancers in their advanced stage. So, I decided to spend my career in basic and translational oncology and try to help patients from the lab.

To cure any disease, we have to figure out what it is, how it relates to the rest of organism and what our own body trying to do with it. Although much has been discovered about cancer, obviously it is not enough given the outcomes of patients with metastatic cancer. Thus, discovering secrets of cancer cells and how they relate with neighboring normal tissue and rest of the organism, along with thinking about potential therapeutic applications of such processes is what excites me the most.

How important is Open Science for the Cancer research community? What role can PLOS One play to contribute to Cancer research?

I would say that Open Science is very important in cancer research because cancer is obviously a complex disease, approaching it from as many sides as possible requires availability of information on both current and past findings and that is why Open science is actually quite crucial for cancer research. Almost a decade ago when I first came across PLOS One website the thing that immediately captured my attention was that journal policy does not care about impact factor and that the only important criterion for publishing is methodological soundness, regardless of the results. I think the latter is of high importance for cancer field because it makes PLOS One an important outlet for the branches of cancer research that deal with less known and less popular aspects of cancer, such as differentiational or metabolic therapy of cancer and drug repurposing.

What motivates you to contribute as an Academic Editor at PLOS ONE? How does this experience complement your work as a researcher?

Since my research and teaching obligations are not of super high pace, I have some free time to dedicate to the wider scientific community. Doing science in lab and also with patients and their samples gives you a unique set of skills in data analysis, experimental design and even in philosophy and ethics. When I got an email from PLOS One I was thinking it would be a pity not to share those skills with rest of scientific community and since old scholastic metaphysical saying is that “good is self-diffusive” I decided to apply to the Academic Editor position. Being an Academic Editor gives me wider perspective, since manuscripts that are coming are not only from my subdiscipline and so I get an overview of all cancer field.

Alongside handling papers as an Academic Editor, you also regularly review manuscripts for PLOS One. Can you share why you feel it is important to continue reviewing papers alongside the editor role?

Yes, I do, and as a matter of fact since I became an Academic Editor the numbers of reviews that I do increased greatly. My main motivation for doing that is twofold; first as AE I have experienced how hard and time consuming is to find a reviewer, so out of compassion to fellow AEs I accept as many review requests as I can; the second reason for peer reviewing is that it is the fabric of science. Unfortunately, at the present moment peer review is facing some serious challenges, most of the scientists apparently do not have time for it or consider it a waste of time, whilst others are expecting some type of financial incentive, altogether I think that most of colleagues are not aware of the fact that if the peer review system breaks apart, the science will break apart along with it.

Disclaimer: Views expressed by contributors are solely those of individual contributors, and not necessarily those of PLOS.

Editor Spotlight series features engaged and dedicated PLOS One Editorial Board members who facilitate excellent peer review processes. If you’d like to be considered for the series, please fill out the interest form.