Uterine Epithelioid Trophoblastic Tumor in a 44-Year-Old Woman: A Diagnostic Dilemma

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

I was pleased to review the Case Report “Uterine epithelioid tumour in a 44 - year-old woman: a diagnostic dilemma”.  The methodology used by the Authors is appropriate for the purpose of the study and conclusions are narrowly linked to data discussion and available evidence. The recourse of images increases the interesting of the manuscript.

In general, the Manuscript may benefit from some revisions, as suggested below:

1. Minor check of English language is required;
2. The introduction section must be improved with a better description of clinical presentation and current management of this of tumor;
3. The discussion section can be improved adding a table with all the other cases diagnosis and management described in literature.

 

Author Response

We were pleased to see your commnents of our article, in this way we are able to have a better scientific quality of it. Please see the attachment with our response. 

Kind regards, 

Gabriela Anitei

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The case report by Aniţei et al discusses a not-so-common tumor type and presented a first-hand experience of dealing with that. The manuscript is well written and overall a sound work. But there are some points that need to be addressed before it goes for publication. 

Major points

1. Figure 4 showing immunohistochemistry is not completely convincing. It is difficult to say the positive or negative panel only by looking at them. Magnified views might help. Since the diagnostic decision depends on the immunohistochemistry profile, these images should be clear enough to be easily interpreted without major doubt.

Minor comments

1. I also recommend an improvement of the HE staining shown in Figure 3. These tissue sections are carrying too much stain.
2. Table 1 can be improved by adding extra columns showing the comparison of the immunohistochemistry panel of PSTT and ETT, along with relevant citations.

Author Response

We were pleased to see your comments for our article, in this way we are able to improve the scientific quality of it. 

Please see the attachment with our responses. 

Kind regards, 

Gabriela Anitei

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Thanks to the authors for their efforts to improve the manuscript. I now recommend this manuscript for publication in the journal.