Next Article in Journal
Detection of Optic Disc Drusen in Children Using Ultrasound through the Lens and Avoiding the Lens—Point of Care Ultrasound Technique of Evaluation Revisited
Next Article in Special Issue
Prophylactic Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy (HIPEC) for Gastric Cancer—A Systematic Review
Previous Article in Journal
Mucins as a New Frontier in Pulmonary Fibrosis
Previous Article in Special Issue
A Lesion-Based Convolutional Neural Network Improves Endoscopic Detection and Depth Prediction of Early Gastric Cancer
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
JCM
Volume 8
Issue 9
10.3390/jcm8091448
Review Report
jcm-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
Article
Peer-Review Record

Significance of the Glasgow Prognostic Score in Predicting the Postoperative Outcome of Patients with Stage III Gastric Cancer

J. Clin. Med. 2019, 8(9), 1448; https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm8091448
by Shun-Wen Hsueh 1,2, Keng-Hao Liu 2,3, Chia-Yen Hung 4,5, Yung-Chia Kuo 2,4, Chun-Yi Tsai 2,3, Jun-Te Hsu 2,3, Yu-Shin Hung 2,4, Ngan-Ming Tsang 2,6 and Wen-Chi Chou 2,4,*
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
J. Clin. Med. 2019, 8(9), 1448; https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm8091448
Submission received: 19 July 2019 / Revised: 2 September 2019 / Accepted: 10 September 2019 / Published: 12 September 2019
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Surgical Management of Gastric Cancer)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear Authors,

Thank you for the opportunity to review your submitted manuscript. Overall, I would support this manuscript for publication after minor revisions (see below). Best wishes for the submission.

Minor Comment(s):

In Introduction, statement "Limited studies have used GPS for postoperative prognostication of patients with locally advanced gastric cancer." (line 56) and equally in Discussion, statement "short-term and long-term postoperative outcomes in advanced gastric cancer have not been fully examined." (line 173).

Should at least reference the studies that are available. For example, a cursory literature search finds:

Melling N, Gruning A, Tachezy M, Nentwich M, Reeh M, Uzunoglu FG, et al. Glasgow Prognostic Score may be a prognostic index for overall and perioperative survival in gastric cancer without perioperative treatment. Surgery. 2016;159(6):1548-56.

This study also reports an association between GPS and perioperative mortality. 

Author Response

Please see the attachment. Thank you. 

Reviewer 2 Report

The paper is well written, however the results are quite obvious: relationship between poorer GPS and survival after surgery is intuitive. I would include much more points to the discussion.

Why did you choose only stage III and not all stages amenable to surgery? What about perioperative chemotherapy? How many patients received pre and post operative CT also according to the latest evidence of FLOT trial? Don't you think that your results are influenced by the chemoterapy administration? A patient with poorer preoperative PS is often not candidated to postoperative treatment. How much this can be a bias to your reported results?

Please improve the two tables: I would split univariate from multivariate and make table 1 easier. 

Author Response

Please see the attachment. Thank you.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

I feel that you have addressed all the main points and the present form is acceptable for publication.

Back to TopTop