Next Article in Journal
Leukemia Stem Cells as a Potential Target to Achieve Therapy-Free Remission in Chronic Myeloid Leukemia
Next Article in Special Issue
Application of Magnetic Nanoparticles for Rapid Detection and In Situ Diagnosis in Clinical Oncology
Previous Article in Journal
Photothermal Therapy as Adjuvant to Surgery in an Orthotopic Mouse Model of Human Fibrosarcoma
Previous Article in Special Issue
Magnetic Particle Imaging: An Emerging Modality with Prospects in Diagnosis, Targeting and Therapy of Cancer
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Cancers
Volume 13
Issue 22
10.3390/cancers13225821
Review Report
cancers-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

Printed Edition

A printed edition of this Special Issue is available at MDPI Books....
share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
Article
Peer-Review Record

Magnetometer-Guided Sentinel Lymph Node Dissection in Prostate Cancer: Rate of Lymph Node Involvement Compared with Radioisotope Marking

Cancers 2021, 13(22), 5821; https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers13225821
by Svenja Engels †, Bianca Michalik †, Luca-Marie Meyer, Lena Nemitz, Friedhelm Wawroschek and Alexander Winter *
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Cancers 2021, 13(22), 5821; https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers13225821
Submission received: 21 September 2021 / Revised: 16 November 2021 / Accepted: 17 November 2021 / Published: 20 November 2021
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Prospects from Diagnosis to Treatment in Cancer Using Magnetic Methods)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The manuscript is a retrospective study comparing the magnetic-guided and standard techniques in terms of their ability to detect lymph node metastases in prostate cancer. More sentinel lymph nodes were detected per patient with the magnetometer. 

The findings are interesting but the following need to be included:

  1. Authors compare two different techniques in different periods with no randomisation or matching. Together with the unadjusted results, propensity score matching needs to be performed and presented.
  2. The STROBE checklist needs to be followed
  3. The Discussion needs to take the propensity score analysis into consideration.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

In the current study, authors have presented an alternative modality of pelvic sentinel-lymphadenectomy (sPLND) in prostate cancer patients that is by magnetometer guidance rather than the conventional radioisotope-guided technique. The retrospective study presented a cohort of 848 and 2092 patient who underwent magnetometer-guided and radioisotope-guided sPLND, respectively. Authors compared the lymph node prostate cancer metastases discovery rate, and the anatomical distribution of the metastases discovery, and the data showed a very similar discovery rate comparing the two modalities. There are many advantages of carrying out magnetometer-guided sPLND as introduced. I believe the paper presented a great feasibility of the magnetometer-guided sPLND.

 

  1. Can authors show some representative IHC stainings of the discovered metastases between the two modalities from the study?

 

  1. As a retrospective study, it is important to show since the study, has there been any follow ups with the patients? How are the disease recurrence rate and disease free survival rate from the 2 groups of the patients?

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The current version approves the manuscript

Author Response

We thank you again for your very helpful review and are pleased with your final approval for publication.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Back to TopTop