Assessment of Health-Related Quality of Life in Patients with Advanced Prostate Cancer—Current State and Future Perspectives
, Roderick C. N. van den Bergh 2, Alberto Martini 3, Giancarlo Marra 4, Massimo Valerio 5, Igor Tsaur 6, Isabel Heidegger 7, Veeru Kasivisvanathan 8, Claudia Kesch 9, Felix Preisser 10, Christian D. Fankhauser 11, Fabio Zattoni 12,13, Francesco Ceci 14, Jonathan Olivier 15, Peter Chiu 16, Ignacio Puche-Sanz 17, Constance Thibault 18, Giorgio Gandaglia 3, Derya Tilki 19,20,21 and on behalf of the YAU Prostate Cancer Working Group †Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The review is generally well-written and informative.
Few minor comments.
Is it YAU Prostate Cancer Working “Party” or “Group”?
Page 3, under 2.3. Benefit of novel therapies: the sentence: “In the mCRPC setting, the absolute benefit in OS versus ADT alone….” is unclear. What are the authors saying here?
Under 2.4. instead of underexposed field, one may write understudied field
Page 5, PROM. What is the meaning of “PROM”?
Sentence: reporting of baseline values has been more and more evolved as a quality standard of recent RCTs but has not been performed in all the displayed studies. Perhaps: reporting of baseline values has more and more evolved as a quality standard of recent RCTs but has not been performed in all the mentioned studies.
Figure 1: FACT total scores – y-axis. What is the meaning of the shown scores? Should be explained.
Page 8, first paragraph, sentence: In this context, it has to be emphasized…The sentence is unclear. What is the meaning of the cut-off values?
Same page, next paragraph, last sentence: “Finally….” What is over-reporting of adverse events? It would imply that some adverse events are reported that did not occur.
Author Response
Please see attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
Title: Assessment of health-related quality of life in patients with advanced prostate cancer – current state and future perspectives
The review is an interesting landascape concerning health related quality of life in patients with advanced prostatic cancer. It is a very current item.
Authors made an overview of the more appropriate questionnairs before pointed out some clinical criticisms about their use.
The paper is easily readable.
Author Response
Thank you very much for your encouraging comment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
