Review on the Role of BRCA Mutations in Genomic Screening and Risk Stratification of Prostate Cancer

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear Editor,

Thanks for giving me the opportunity of reviewing your manuscript. This is an interesting state of art on BRCA mutations and metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer.

The manuscript is well written, organized and, includes updated on recent articles.

From my point of view two minor points need to be issued before final acceptance for publication:

“Metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer”, please precise if patient were already metastatic castration resistant at diagnosis or become metastatic castration resistant following treatments.

“A narrative review of all available literature was performed”, please precise how this review was performed, how articles were selected, how database was interrogated?

Also, those point were only mentioned with the abstract but not the manuscript…

 Sentence in 25-27 line should be corrected.

 Best regards,

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Kalampokis et al summarize current knowledge and recommendations (in various guidelines) regarding genetic testing in mPC with emphasis on BRCA 1 and 2.

The review is well written, easily understood, and adds a helpful, easy-to-understand, overview in a complex topic.

Major comment

1. How were the reviwed publications chosen? Was the literature search systematic or were "landmark" publications chosen? The selection process is too summarically described.

2. Given the diverging recommendations it would be nice if the author put their findings in perspective and gave their own view on how to screen for genetic alterations.

Minor comments

1. There are numbers in brackets in the abstract - what do they refer to?

2. Line 208,209 unclear what the authors mean, please revise the sentence.

Author Response

Please see  the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear authors,

Thanks for considering my recommendation.

Now the manuscript is almost acceptable for publication.

 I will try to be more specific for the small mistake in 26-27 line now:

 Gene testing should be offered to patients with metastatic PCa. those with 2-3 first degree relatives with PCa, or age<55 and one close relative with breast (age≤50 years) or invasive ovarian cancer. (4)

There is an extra dot after PCa. If not the second sentence have no verb etc.

I guess that the editorial office can correct that matter.

All the best,

Author Response

Thanks for your remark. Typo corrected

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Revisions are sufficient and the manuscript seems suitable for publication.

Author Response

Thanks for your remark