Next Article in Journal
Renal Cell Carcinoma Health Disparities in Stage and Mortality among American Indians/Alaska Natives and Hispanic Americans: Comparison of National Cancer Database and Arizona Cancer Registry Data
Previous Article in Journal
HIF-Prolyl Hydroxylase Domain Proteins (PHDs) in Cancer—Potential Targets for Anti-Tumor Therapy?
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Immune-Related Adverse Events (irAE) in Cancer Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors (ICI) and Survival Outcomes Correlation: To Rechallenge or Not?

Cancers 2021, 13(5), 989; https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers13050989
by Heidar J. Albandar 1, Jacob Fuqua 2, Jasim M. Albandar 3, Salahuddin Safi 1, Samuel A. Merrill 1 and Patrick C. Ma 4,*
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Cancers 2021, 13(5), 989; https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers13050989
Submission received: 1 February 2021 / Revised: 17 February 2021 / Accepted: 19 February 2021 / Published: 27 February 2021
(This article belongs to the Section Cancer Immunology and Immunotherapy)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

All comments that were rated by the reviewer were addressed.

Author Response

We thank Reviewer 1’s time and effort in the review and favorable feedback.

Reviewer 2 Report

The manuscript “Immune-related adverse events (irAE) in cancer immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) and survival outcomes correlation: to rechallenge or not?” by Albandar JH et al. addresses an important aspect of the disadvantages of the use of immune checkpoint inhibitor such as the rise of immune-related adverse event. Due to the relatively few similar previous studies, the authors “aimed to investigate whether the differences in outcomes between patients who were rechallenged after an irAE and those who had ICIs discontinued”.

After the second round of revision, the manuscript has been highly improved and the results and discussion are consistent to the objectives. However, they are still few minor concerns to solve.

 

Major concerns:

 

There are no major concerns.

 

 

Minor concerns:

 

  1. During the review process, some typing errors have been introduced. For example, line 368 “reintiation”. Please double check the manuscript for typographical errors.

 

  1. Figure 1B quality and style of the graph should be improved, matching figure 1A and the legend “rechallenged” should be changed as it should not include patients not interrupted after irAEs. Indeed, figure 1B is no longer mentioned in the text so it may be better to just eliminate it.

Author Response

  1. We thank Reviewer 2 for the overall favorable feedback and comments. We have now conducted a thorough review of the revised manuscript with a number of typographical errors and text changes corrected for accuracy and better clarity.

2. We are deleting Figure 1B from the manuscript and suggesting that we leave it as a supplemental figure 2 

 

Back to TopTop