Next Article in Journal
The Application of Bicarbonate Recovers the Chemical-Physical Properties of Airway Surface Liquid in Cystic Fibrosis Epithelia Models
Previous Article in Journal
Retinal and Choriocapillaris Vascular Changes in Patients Affected by Different Clinical Phenotypes of β-Thalassemia: An Optical Coherence Tomography Angiography Study
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Leptomeningeal Carcinomatosis: A Clinical Dilemma in Neuroendocrine Neoplasms

Biology 2021, 10(4), 277; https://doi.org/10.3390/biology10040277
by Leonidas Apostolidis 1, Jörg Schrader 2, Henning Jann 3, Anja Rinke 4,* and Sebastian Krug 5,*
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Biology 2021, 10(4), 277; https://doi.org/10.3390/biology10040277
Submission received: 25 February 2021 / Revised: 21 March 2021 / Accepted: 26 March 2021 / Published: 28 March 2021
(This article belongs to the Section Cancer Biology)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

In their manuscript, Apostodolis and Co-Workers aimed to evaluate the frequency, clinical characteristics, diagnostic steps, treatments and outcomes of Leptomeningeal Carcinomatosis (LP) in patients with NEN (excluding SCLC and LCLC) from four NET Centres.

The identified 17 patients with LC. Confirmed LC was defined as the presence of malignant cells corresponding to the underlying disease in a liquor puncture.

The manuscript is well conducted and well structured.

Major points:

  • What is the frequency of LP in the population? ( I might have missed this figure, included the total number of the NEN patients evaluated)
  • Do the Authors consider appropriate the G1/G2/G3 classification for all NENs? (I.e. typical and atypical lung carcinoids?
  • Given the definition of LC confirmation (CSF cytology), how the percentages of Meningeosis confirmed by non-CSF cytology criteria (Table 1) should be interpreted? Same point in page 4, lines 120 to 123

 

Minor Point

  • Is mOS “median Overall Survival”?

Author Response

We have attached a point by point reply.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Interesting data on a topic not frequently studied. Seventeen patients are presented however following the definition of LC, only 5 fulfilled the criteria set by the authors (positive liquor puncture). Why was liquor puncture not performed in all 17 patients? It should be pointed out that in 12/17 patients there was suspicion of LC. Although the numbers are very low, was there any difference between the 5 patients with positive liquor puncture and the 12 patients with suspicion of LC based on clinical and radiologic findings, respectively?
What are radiological criteria for the diagnosis of LC?
What are the findings on PET/CT (18F FDG and 68Ga DOTA-) in these patients?

 

 

Author Response

We have attached a point by point reply. 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Back to TopTop