Next Article in Journal
The Multikinase Inhibitor AD80 Induces Mitotic Catastrophe and Autophagy in Pancreatic Cancer Cells
Next Article in Special Issue
Statins in Cancer Prevention and Therapy
Previous Article in Journal
Young Adult Caregiving Daughters and Diagnosed Mothers Navigating Breast Cancer Together: Open and Avoidant Communication and Psychosocial Outcomes
Previous Article in Special Issue
A Novel Method Using Fine Needle Aspiration from Tumor-Draining Lymph Nodes Could Enable the Discovery of New Prognostic Markers in Patients with Cutaneous Squamous Cell Carcinoma
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Tumor and Nodal Disease Growth Rates in Patients with Oropharyngeal Squamous Cell Carcinoma

Cancers 2023, 15(15), 3865; https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers15153865
by Nicole I. Farber 1,†, Yimin Li 2,3,†, Roberto N. Solis 1, Joy Chen 1, Zahrah Masheeb 1, Machelle Wilson 4, Arnaud F. Bewley 1, Marianne Abouyared 1, Shyam Rao 2, Yi Rong 2,5 and Andrew C. Birkeland 1,*
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Cancers 2023, 15(15), 3865; https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers15153865
Submission received: 23 May 2023 / Revised: 24 July 2023 / Accepted: 24 July 2023 / Published: 29 July 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue 2nd Edition: Targeting Head and Neck Cancer)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear Authors,

I read with interest your work "Tumor and Nodal Disease Growth Rates in Patients with Oro-pharyngeal Squamous Cell Carcinoma" that discuss an interesting topic.

The authors aimed to define the growth rates of OPSCC, to assess the average daily growth rates of both primary site and metastatic nodal disease, characterize the heterogeneity of tumor growth in this population, and to correlate primary cancer and metastatic nodal volume with oncologic outcomes.

While the results and conclusions are not novel, they are based on solid statistical data and help to extend the knowledge on the causes of adipose cell resorption, which may be beneficial in the future.

Therefore, I have no further comments against the manuscript.

Author Response

Please see the attachment. 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

It was not mentioned in the text (Material and Methods) the Ethics approval number and date.

A higher clarity and concision may be useful. In the Conclusion it is not necessary to mention the aim of the study. It was already presented. The specific conclusions based on the results, may be necessary.

'This study aimed to identify a potential biomarker, quantify growth rates for OPSCC, and to evaluate if it has any association with other known biomarks or survival''.

A reading of the text and correction of  writing and editing small errors may be useful.

Author Response

Please see the attachment. 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Back to TopTop