Next Article in Journal
E. coli Phagelysate: A Primer to Enhance Nanoparticles and Drug Deliveries in Tumor
Previous Article in Journal
MRI-Based Tumor Necrosis Depiction in Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma: Can It Predict Tumor Aggressiveness?
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Clinical Outcome of Low-Grade Myofibroblastic Sarcoma in Japan: A Multicenter Study from the Japanese Musculoskeletal Oncology Group

Cancers 2023, 15(8), 2314; https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers15082314
by Munehisa Kito 1, Keisuke Ae 2, Masanori Okamoto 1,*, Makoto Endo 3, Kunihiro Ikuta 4, Akihiko Takeuchi 5, Naohiro Yasuda 6,7, Taketoshi Yasuda 8, Yoshinori Imura 9, Takeshi Morii 10, Kazutaka Kikuta 11, Teruya Kawamoto 12, Yutaka Nezu 13, Ichiro Baba 14, Shusa Ohshika 15, Takeshi Uehara 16, Takafumi Ueda 17, Jun Takahashi 1 and Hirotaka Kawano 18
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2:
Cancers 2023, 15(8), 2314; https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers15082314
Submission received: 17 February 2023 / Revised: 10 April 2023 / Accepted: 14 April 2023 / Published: 15 April 2023
(This article belongs to the Topic Soft Tissue Sarcomas: Treatment and Management)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This research is about a rare disease in Japan, the authors presented the clinical outcome of Low-Grade Myofibroblastic Sarcoma. 

Since this is a rare disease, not all the physicians have a chance to see the histology pictures, the authors have showed some histology result in the paper, this reviewer ask the authors to added some immunohistochemistry photographs to this paper. 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

In this retrospective multicenter study the Authors aimed to analyze the clinical features and prognosis of 25 patients diagnosed with Low-grade myofibroblastic sarcoma.

The topic is interesting and the study well designed.

Introduction: please add some details about multimodal treatment and what is already known about prognosis of this sarcoma.

In order to homogenize data, I would exclude the only one case arising from bone.

3.3. it is not clear whether surgical excision was planned intralesional in one case. Table 2. case 11 wide excision but R1 margins...please check.case 12. marginal excision R0.

I would add a table including review of already described cases in the Literature.

Please have the paper checked by an English native speaker.

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Thank you to the Authors for the efforts in ameliorating their paper.

In my opinion, it is now suitable for publication.

 

Back to TopTop