Next Article in Journal
Association Between Atherosclerosis-Related Cardiovascular Disease and Uveitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Next Article in Special Issue
Updates on HPV Vaccination
Previous Article in Journal
Recurrent Prostate Cancer Diagnostics with 18F-PSMA-1007 PET/CT: A Systematic Review of the Current State
Previous Article in Special Issue
Tissue Characteristics of Endometrial Carcinoma Analyzed by Quantitative Synthetic MRI and Diffusion-Weighted Imaging
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Diagnostics
Volume 12
Issue 12
10.3390/diagnostics12123177
Review Report
diagnostics-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
Review
Peer-Review Record

Protein Glycosylation as Biomarkers in Gynecologic Cancers

Diagnostics 2022, 12(12), 3177; https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics12123177
by Hung Shen 1, Chia-Yi Lee 1 and Chi-Hau Chen 2,*
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Diagnostics 2022, 12(12), 3177; https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics12123177
Submission received: 25 September 2022 / Revised: 1 December 2022 / Accepted: 9 December 2022 / Published: 15 December 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Current and Future Approaches to Prevention and Early Detection of Women's Cancers)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

 

This manuscript describes a review of biomarkers for gynecologic cancer. The contents are clear and easy for general readers to understand. However, biomarkers described in this manuscript are not always glycoprotein and not refer its glycan structure. A reviewer feels additional description improves this review manuscript.

 

In terms of general biomarkers such as CA125, CA53, CEA and AFP, the authors should show their specificity and sensitivity for diagnosis of gynecologic cancer according to previous reports using a big cohort.

 

In terms of glycan biomarkers, Mgat4 and chorionic carcinoma, Mgat5 and cancer metastasis of gynecologic cancer, fructosyltransferase and ovarian cancer should be included. These papers are well known in glycobiology research.

Author Response

Please see the attachment. Thank you very much

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

This is a review regarding the role of glycosylated markers in gynaecological cancers. The methodology of literature search is not clear. I have the following comments:

1.            What search strategies were used for this review?

2.            Which databases were searched?

3.            A systematic review should be performed when submitting manuscripts to a journal like this.

4.            It would be more prudent to divide this text into three parts (ovarian, endometrial and cervical) and discuss a possible role of these biomarkers in these cancers.

5.            In the introduction section the authors should discuss what the existing screening strategies are for these cancers. CA125 has been proven to be ineffective in ovarian cancer screening and respective studies should be mentioned with regards to this topic.

6.            The summary should be rewritten. The authors should provide an explanation regarding the limitations of these markers in diagnosing gynaecological cancers. Is it cost-beneficial to use these markers in screening strategies and in follow-up?

Author Response

Please see the attachment. Thank you very much.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

All comments have been addressed and I 

believe the manuscript is now suitable for

publication

Author Response

Thank you for your kind and helpful advise.

Back to TopTop