Impact of PET/CT Imaging with FDG in Locally Advanced Cervical Carcinoma—A Literature Review

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This is a well written article. Nevertheless, more work is needed. An important parameter is to include more updated publications as most of the publications included are more than 20 years old. More specific comments are included in the following lines.

L40-49: This paragraph includes several statements that need be supported by the literature. Please include references for each statement.

L50: Please revise "The chief advantage..."

L89-100: Please add literature.

L109-120: Please include references.

L134-135: "FDG-PET's ability to detect almost 100% of the primary tumors cervix have been demonstrated by different research studies." --> This is a very strong statement.  Please provide literature.

L318: Please correct the name of radionuclides, number should be in a different format: "... using radiotracers labeled with 15O, 18F and 11C"

Discussion: Please include some future guidelines for the domain. It is very important to mention where the scientific community needs to put effort.

References: Most of the reference are outdated. It is important to included more recent publications.

Author Response

Please find the Reviewer comments and Authors response related changes made of the review article entitled “Impact of PET/ CT Imaging with FDG in Locally Advanced Cervical Carcinoma- a Literature Review”. The modifications and suggestions are highlighted in text. Thanks

This is a well written article. Nevertheless, more work is needed. An important parameter is to include more updated publications as most of the publications included are more than 20 years old. More specific comments are included in the following lines.

L40-49: This paragraph includes several statements that need be supported by the literature. Please include references for each statement.

Added and highlighted as per recommendation.

L50: Please revise "The chief advantage..."

Correction done.

L89-100: Please add literature.

Recent literature added and references updated i.e. 28-30.

L109-120: Please include references.

Recent publications references added as per suggestions

L134-135: "FDG-PET's ability to detect almost 100% of the primary tumors cervix have been demonstrated by different research studies." --> This is a very strong statement.  Please provide literature.

Correction made and recent references added as suggested i.e. Reference 33

L318: Please correct the name of radionuclides, number should be in a different format: "... using radiotracers labeled with 15O, 18F and 11C"

Done

Discussion: Please include some future guidelines for the domain. It is very important to mention where the scientific community needs to put effort.

Added

References: Most of the reference are outdated. It is important to included more recent publications.

Old references removed and recent added. Highlighting done.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

- The proposed paper presentes a detailed review on the use of  PET / CT imaging techniques in the scope of cervical carcinoma diagnosis and therapy;

- An effort should be made to use more recent published data (e.g. global cancer statistics, as there are plenty of data after 2017 or 2004);    

 -Also, concerning the literature survey carried out it would be informative to describe the period of time considered, as well as the number of paper considered (and "rejection criteria", case any);

- A final paragraph at the end of section 1  ("Introduction") describing the structure of the paper would also be useful for the reader.

Author Response

Please find the Reviewer comments and Authors response related changes made of the review article entitled “Impact of PET/ CT Imaging with FDG in Locally Advanced Cervical Carcinoma- a Literature Review”. The modifications and suggestions are highlighted in text. Thanks

The proposed paper presentes a detailed review on the use of  PET / CT imaging techniques in the scope of cervical carcinoma diagnosis and therapy;

An effort should be made to use more recent published data (e.g. global cancer statistics, as there are plenty of data after 2017 or 2004);  

Recent data and references added as per suggestion.

 Also, concerning the literature survey carried out it would be informative to describe the period of time considered, as well as the number of paper considered (and "rejection criteria", case any);

Added according to recommendation.

A final paragraph at the end of section 1  ("Introduction") describing the structure of the paper would also be useful for the reader.

The lines added as suggested.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The article has been improved. This reviewer only expects one important addition. Please include future guidelines for the research in this domain. It is a pity such a review article, to not provide future perspectives.

Author Response

The article has been improved. This reviewer only expects one important addition. Please include future guidelines for the research in this domain. It is a pity such a review article, to not provide future perspectives.

Additions are being made as per suggestions.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx