Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The authors have focused on one of the emerging threats with statistical data in a good way. However, in my opinion, they should discuss the data not only in terms of numbers but rather create a style of writing and presentation so that readers would get interested in the same. A graphical representation of facts with different illustrative elements would be certainly better and more impactful rather than numerical texts.

I don't find any flaw myself related to statistics but still, I believe it would be better to have the opinion of a biostatistician on this, as I am not an expert in that field either.

In the conclusion part, the authors should mention the key highlights of each section. 

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 1:

Comment: The authors have focused on one of the emerging threats with statistical data in a good way. However, in my opinion, they should discuss the data not only in terms of numbers but rather create a style of writing and presentation so that readers would get interested in the same. A graphical representation of facts with different illustrative elements would be certainly better and more impactful rather than numerical texts.

Response: We have added some more figures to the manuscript to visually demonstrate some of the results presented.

Comment: I don't find any flaw myself related to statistics but still, I believe it would be better to have the opinion of a biostatistician on this, as I am not an expert in that field either.

In the conclusion part, the authors should mention the key highlights of each section. 

Response: We have added some key highlights and future directions to the conclusion section.

Reviewer 2 Report

The authors provide with this manuscript the most up-to-date surveillance estimates for primary CNS tumours in Canada. The data presented are overall in agreement with similar data from other countries; however, the authors give very interesting insights on what needs to be done to improve the capture of all primary brain tumours in cancer registries in Canada and generally show surveillance patterns that are compatible with those reported in the US and some European countries. Beyond a general spell check, this manuscript is ready for publication. I would try to improve the quality of the KM curves. They look pixalated and the keys are really small to see. 

Author Response

Reviewer 2:

Comment: The authors provide with this manuscript the most up-to-date surveillance estimates for primary CNS tumours in Canada. The data presented are overall in agreement with similar data from other countries; however, the authors give very interesting insights on what needs to be done to improve the capture of all primary brain tumours in cancer registries in Canada and generally show surveillance patterns that are compatible with those reported in the US and some European countries. Beyond a general spell check, this manuscript is ready for publication. I would try to improve the quality of the KM curves. They look pixalated and the keys are really small to see. 

 

Response: We have done another review of the grammar and spelling and increased the size and resolution of the figures.