Review for 10.1186/s12876-018-0849-0 (2018)

Reviewer ’s report  
Title: Transarterial chemoembolization plus sor afenib for  the management of unresectable 
hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review and meta -analysis  
 
Version: 0 Date: 27 Dec 2017  
 
Reviewer: Rudolf Stauber  
 
Reviewer's report:  
Li et al. present a systematic review and meta -analysis of combined TACE plus sorafenib 
treatment for unresectable HCC. Among 1551 potentially relevant articles, 14 non -comparative 
and 13 comparative studies were included. The authors conclude that combination therapy 
significantly improves TTP and DCR but not OS.  
 
The issue of TACE +sorafenib combination treatment is of high clinical relevance and the present 
meta -analysis has the merit of including a large number of comparative studies on this topic.  
 
However, several points need further attention:  
 
1. English language is very poor,  this precludes a clear presentation.  
 
2. Quality assessment of the individual comparative studies is lacking.  
 
3. In order to minimize heterogeneity, Asia -Pacific versus Western studies should be analyzed 
separately.  
 
4. Likewise, studies using c -TACE versus DEB -TACE should be analyzed separately.  
 
5. Background, second paragraph, last sentence: should read surgical resection (not surgical 
section).  
 
Are the methods appropriate and well desc ribed?  
If not, please specify what is required in your comments to the authors.  
No 
Does the work include the necessary controls?  
If not, please specify which controls are required in your comments to the authors.  
Unable to assess  
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the data shown?  
If not, please explain in your comments to the authors.  
No 
Are you able to assess any statistics in the manus cript or would you recommend an 
additional statistical review?  
If an a dditional statistical review is recommended, please speci fy what a spects 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:  
Not suitable for publication unless extensively edited  
Declaration of competing interests  
Please complete a declaration of competing interests, considering the following questions:  
1. Have you in the past five years rece ived reimbursements, fees, 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 that 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 de clare 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 understand that my name will be included 
on my re port to the authors and, if the manuscript is accepted for 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 Crea tive 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 editors, which will not be published.  
 
I agree to t he open peer review policy of the journal