Role of Endoscopy in Management of Upper Gastrointestinal Cancers
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
This review is summarizing the current state of endsocopy in the diagnosis and management of various GI diseases. It may be cosidered as a wholesale article including everything in a brief manner.
Author Response
Point 1: This review is summarizing the current state of endsocopy in the diagnosis and management of various GI diseases. It may be considered as a wholesale article including everything in a brief manner.
Response: We thank the reviewer for this feedback. Our goal was to provide a comprehensive overview of the role of upper endoscopy in upper GI cancer while highlighting recent developments in surveillance and treatment. We have included additional figures and tables to improve readability.
Reviewer 2 Report
The review is generally well-written and quite comprehensive. However, it will be easier and interesting for the reader to follow if the authors include additional figures and tables summarize the role of Endoscopy in different aspects of upper GI cancer management.
Author Response
Point 1: The review is generally well-written and quite comprehensive. However, it will be easier and interesting for the reader to follow if the authors include additional figures and tables summarize the role of Endoscopy in different aspects of upper GI cancer management.
Response: We greatly appreciate the reviewer’s suggestions for improvement. We are adding the following tables and figures to our manuscript:
1) figure depicting the most common upper endoscopy modalities
2) table summarizing the screening and surveillance guidelines of pre-malignant upper GI lesions
3) table summarizing the role of various diagnostic modalities in staging upper GI cancers
4) figure explaining EMR and ESD resection techniques
Reviewer 3 Report
The article submitted by the authors presents a broad overview of endoscopy in upper GI cancers. The article can inform the scientific community about several important aspects of this approach. However, the article can be accepted for publication, but it needs some modification to improve its readability.
1. The article should be a balanced overview of endoscopic methods and therefore it must discuss a separate section on limitations and challenges in addition to applications.
2. The article should contain figures to generate the interest of readers for the application of different endoscopic methods used in GI cancers.
3. The article may provide a comparative overview of different methods and their application under different conditions.
Author Response
The article submitted by the authors presents a broad overview of endoscopy in upper GI cancers. The article can inform the scientific community about several important aspects of this approach. However, the article can be accepted for publication, but it needs some modification to improve its readability.
Point 1: The article should be a balanced overview of endoscopic methods and therefore it must discuss a separate section on limitations and challenges in addition to applications.
Response 1: We thank the reviewer for the constructive feedback. We have added a paragraph in the “Summary and Future Directions” section that summarizes the current limitations of upper endoscopy. Additionally, in each individual section, conflicting guidelines and novel techniques that are not well-established are noted.
Point 2: The article should contain figures to generate the interest of readers for the application of different endoscopic methods used in GI cancers.
Response 2: We have added two figures--the first one depicting the various types of images obtained during endoscopy, and the second one showing a comparison of EMR and ESD techniques.
Point 3: The article may provide a comparative overview of different methods and their application under different conditions.
Response 3: Tables summarizing pre-malignant upper GI malignancies and staging in upper GI cancers were added. These tables include sections that compare the advantages and limitations of different diagnostic techniques (i.e, endoscopy vs cross-sectional imaging)
Reviewer 4 Report
Topic of manuscript is suitable for the diseases. Nevertheless, some poinst can be taken.
1) Authors should include table, which compare the advantages and disadvantages. conventional endoscopy against other relevant diagnostic methods.
2) Discussed clinical studies should be summarised in table/tables.
3) Basic characteristics of discussed oncological diseases should summarized in table.
4) Into manuscript should be included relevant figures.
Author Response
Point 1: Authors should include table, which compare the advantages and disadvantages. conventional endoscopy against other relevant diagnostic methods.
Response 1: We would like to thank the reviewer for this feedback. We have added tables summarizing pre-malignant upper GI malignancies and staging in upper GI cancers were added. These tables include sections that compare the advantages and limitations of different diagnostic techniques (i.e, endoscopy vs cross-sectional imaging)
Point 2: Discussed clinical studies should be summarised in table/tables.
Response 2: We added tables that summarize surveillance/screening guidelines, and specified the source of these guidelines.
Point 3: Basic characteristics of discussed oncological diseases should summarized in table.
Response 3: We added a table on pre-malignant lesions that summarizes the high-risk features of each disease category
Point 4: Into manuscript should be included relevant figures.
Response 4: We have added figures depicting the various types of images obtained during endoscopy and comparing EMR and ESD techniques
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
The revised version addressed my concerns, but might need to be proofread better.
Author Response
The revised version addressed my concerns, but might need to be proofread better.
Thank you for the reply. I have thoroughly proofread the entire manuscript multiple times and made small grammatical changes as needed.
Reviewer 3 Report
The authors have responded well to the comments.
Author Response
Thank you for the reply. I have thoroughly proofread the entire manuscript multiple times and made small grammatical changes as needed.
