Next Article in Journal
Sepsis Trajectory Prediction Using Privileged Information and Continuous Physiological Signals
Next Article in Special Issue
Correlation between Histopathological Prognostic Tumor Characteristics and [18F]FDG Uptake in Corresponding Metastases in Newly Diagnosed Metastatic Breast Cancer
Previous Article in Journal
Home Haemoglobin Monitoring for the Titration of Erythropoietin-Stimulating Agents in Chronic Kidney Disease: A Pragmatic Pilot Trial
Previous Article in Special Issue
Best Practices in Nuclear Imaging for the Diagnosis of Transthyretin Amyloid Cardiomyopathy (ATTR-CM) in KSA: The Eagle Eyes of Local Experts
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Use of [18F]Fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography after Curative Treatment of Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer Patients: A Nationwide Cohort Study

Diagnostics 2024, 14(2), 233; https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics14020233
by Kasper Foged Guldbrandsen 1,*, Liza Sopina 2, Torben Riis Rasmussen 3 and Barbara Malene Fischer 1
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2:
Diagnostics 2024, 14(2), 233; https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics14020233
Submission received: 12 December 2023 / Revised: 7 January 2024 / Accepted: 17 January 2024 / Published: 22 January 2024
(This article belongs to the Special Issue 18F-FDG PET/CT: Current and Future Clinical Applications)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

this is in an interesting analysis, detailing use of PET/CT in the surveillance setting. It nicely sets up the awaited results of the SUPER trial.

It is largely informational, however, and does not inform practice in any meaningful sense. Also, as it is taken from  a single country's database - it's generalizability (even informational) is limited.

it is well written, and scientifically sound given the analysis in question.

it is suitable for publication.

Author Response

Thank you for your feedback. We acknowledge the limitations regarding the generalizability of our findings and appreciate your support for publication.

Best regards,
Kasper Foged Guldbrandsen
Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I have only a major comment, can you precise the numbers of patients excluded of the analysis and the reasons of exclusion and check if there is not a differents exclusions rate according to yhe year of diagnosis

Author Response

Thank you for your comment. Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Back to TopTop