Title: Prediction of recurrence-related factors for patients with early-stage cervical cancer
following radical hysterectomy and adjuvant radiotherapy
Version: 0 Date: 16 Nov 2023
Reviewer's report:
The study aimed to examine recurrent factors in patients with clinical early-stage cervical cancer
(ESCC) after hysterectomy followed by adjuvant radiotherapy. The results are interesting.
However, I have raised some major and minor comments that would improve the manuscript.
Major comments:
1. Clarity and organization: The paper lacks clear organization and structure, making it
challenging for readers to follow the rationale and objectives of the study.
2. Methodology and study design: The study design and methodology are not adequately
described. A more comprehensive overview of the research design is necessary for readers to
evaluate the study's validity.
3. Data collection and patient collection: The criteria for patient selection and the data collection
process are not thoroughly explained. Specific details about how patients were identified,
recruited, and monitored during the study period are essential for assessing the study's reliability
and reproducibility.
4. Incomplete information: Some critical information is missing, such as the characteristics of
patients who experienced recurrence and the distribution of patients across different stages.
Providing these details would enhance the paper's completeness and relevance.
5. Statistical analysis: The statistical methods used for analysis need more elaboration. Detailed
information on why specific statistical tests were chosen, the assumptions made, and potential
confounding factors considered is crucial for interpreting the results accurately.
6. Clinical relevance: The paper does not sufficiently discuss the clinical relevance of the
findings. How the results contribute to the current understanding of cervical cancer prognosis
and treatment is not well articulated.
7. Follow-up protocol: The follow-up protocol is briefly mentioned, but it lacks specifics. Details
regarding the frequency and nature of follow-up examinations, the criteria used for recurrence
determination, and the management of recurrent cases need to be provided for a comprehensive
evaluation.
8. Treatment protocol: The description of adjuvant radiotherapy and chemotherapy protocols
is not detailed enough. Specific doses, frequency, and duration of treatment, as well as any
modifications made during the course, should be thoroughly explained.
9. Risk factors and prognostic indicators: The paper discusses risk factors and prognostic
indicators without a clear rationale for their selection. A more detailed explanation of why certain
factors were chosen and their clinical significance is needed.
10. Discussion section: The discussion section is relatively brief and does not adequately address
the study's limitations, implications, or avenues for future research. Expanding this section
would strengthen the overall paper.
Minor comments:
1. Abbreviations: The paper introduces several abbreviations without providing a
comprehensive list or defining them upon first use, impeding understanding.
2. Doi: the majority of the references do not have doi.