Review for 10.1186/s12876-020-01355-3 (2020)

Reviewer ’s report  
 
Title: Transarterial Chemoembolizatio n Combined with Iodine  125 Seeds Versus Transarterial 
Chemoembolization Combined with Radiofrequency Ablatio n in the Treatment of Early and 
Intermediate Hepatocellular Carcinoma  
 
Version: 0 Date: 18 Feb 2020  
 
Reviewer: Alessandro Vitale  
 
Reviewer's report:  
 
This is an interesting mono center retrospective study comparing the efficacy and safety of 
TACE + Iodine 125 seeds v s TACE + RF in BCLC A and B HCC patients.  
 
The authors found that these two potential strategies were similar also after PSM.  
 
 
I suggest some major and minor revisions:  
 
Major:  
 
1) The main limit of this study is the relative small sample size of the study co hort (47 patients). 
PSM decreased the sample size of the control group. I suggest to use inverse probability weight 
method to increase the sample size of the study cohort (instead of deceasing the sample size of 
the control group).  
 
2) Some considerations about the costs of these two procedures should be added in the 
discussion.  
 
 
Minor:  
 
1) In Table 1 percentages of nominal/ordinal variables should be reported.  
 
2) I suggest to add KM survival figures comparing the two procedures in BCLC A and BCLC B 
patients and to describe median survivals of these subgroups in the results. In fact, it is important 
for the reader to understand if these procedures obtain median s urvival comparable or superior to 
that conventionally reported in the literature for BCLC A and B patients.  
 
Are the methods appropriate and well described?  
If not, please specify what is required in your comments to the authors.  
 
Yes 
 
Does  the work include the necessary controls?  
If not, please specify which controls are required in your comments to the authors.  
 
Yes 
 
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the data shown?  
If not, please explain in your comments to the authors.  
 
Yes 
 
Are you able to assess any statistics in the manus cript or would you recommend an 
additional statistical review?  
If an additional statistical review is recommended, please speci fy what aspects require further 
assessment in your comments to the editors.  
 
I am able to assess the statistics  
 
Quality of written English  
Please indicate the quality of language in the manuscript:  
 
Acceptable  
 
Declaration of competing interests  
Please complete a declaration of competing interests, considering the following questions:  
 
1.  Have you in the past five years received reimbursements, f ees, funding, or salary 
from an organisation that may in any way gain or lose financial ly from the 
publication of this manuscript, either now or in the future?  
 
2.  Do you hold any stocks or shares in an organisation t hat may in any way gain or 
lose financially from the publication of this manuscript, either now or in the 
future?  
 
3.  Do you hold or are you currently applying for any patents  relating to the content 
of the manuscript?  
 
4.  Have you received reimbursements, fees, funding, or salary from an organization 
that holds or has applied for patents relating to the content of the manuscript?  
 
5.  Do you have any other financial competing interests?  
 
6.  Do you have any non -financial com peting interests in relation to this paper?  
 
If you can answer no to all of the above, write 'I declare that I have  no competing interests' 
below. If your reply is yes to any, please give details below.  
 
I declare that I have no competing interests  
I agree t o the open peer review policy of the journal. I understan d that my name will be included 
on my report to the authors and, if the manuscript is accepted f or publication, my named report 
including any attachments I upload will be posted on the website along with the authors' 
responses. I agree for my report to be made available under an Open Access Creative Commons 
CC-BY license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ). I understand that any comments 
which I do not wish to be included in my named report can be in cluded as confidential comments 
to the editors, which will not be published.  
 
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal