Review for 10.1186/s12876-020-01241-y (2020)

Reviewer ’s report  
 
Title:  Comparative cost -effectiveness of cabozantinib as second -line therapy for patients with 
advanced hepatocellular carcinoma in Germany and the United States  
 
Version: 0 Date: 11 Mar 2020  
 
Reviewer: Qiu Li  
 
Reviewer's report:  
 
Please include all comments for the authors in th is box rather than uploading your report as an 
attachment. Please only upload as attachments annotated versions of manuscripts, graphs, 
supporting materials or other aspects of your report which cannot be included in a text format.  
Please overwrite this te xt when adding your comments to the authors.  
 
This work is well done.  
Here should have some revisions.  
In the abstract,  "We evaluated the cost -effectiveness of ... from the German statutory health 
insurance perspective compared with US prices." this sente nce should be modified.  
The authors should describe how they measure the cost for temporal limited  treatment.  
In the text,  the authors   used   "adjusted   gamma distributions for cost inputs, a beta distribution 
for the discounting rate and a normal dis tribution for utilities." Here should have some citations, 
or explain why they chose the above distribution.  
Overall, though there was three published cost -effectiveness analysis for cabozantinib in second -
line HCC from US perspective, the authors added th e German statutory health insurance 
perspective.  
 
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 co ntrols?  
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 asses s 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 recommend additional statistical review  
 
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 recei ved 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 competing 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 to 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 author s' 
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 included  as confidential comments 
to the editor s, which will not be published.  
 
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal