Title: A modified GLIM criteria-based nomogram for the survival prediction of Gastric Cancer
Patients undergoing Surgical Resection
Version: 2 Date: 20 Jul 2024
Reviewer:  Mohamed Ibrahim
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for giving me the opportunity to review this Retrospective cohort study on 210
patients undergoing radical resection for gastric cancer, divided into a development cohort (150
patients) and an external validation cohort (60 patients). The following is my main critiques:
1- A small sample size can limit the power of the study to detect significant differences and may
increase the margin of error. In addition, there is a risk of overfitting the model, which may not
perform well in different or larger populations.
2- The 5-year survival rate difference between well-nourished and malnourished patients
(97.78% vs. 85.00%) suggests a significant impact of nutritional status on survival. However,
the lack of details on other potentially influential factors (such as cancer stage, comorbidities,
and treatment variations) makes it hard to attribute differences solely to nutritional status.
3- The inclusion of CRP as an inflammatory marker significantly improved model sensitivity
and specificity. However, the study lacks a comparative analysis of other potential inflammatory
markers, limiting the understanding of whether CRP is the best choice.
Title: A modified GLIM criteria-based nomogram for the survival prediction of Gastric Cancer
Patients undergoing Surgical Resection
Version: 2 Date: 20 Jul 2024
Reviewer:  Mohamed Ibrahim
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for giving me the opportunity to review this Retrospective cohort study on 210
patients undergoing radical resection for gastric cancer, divided into a development cohort (150
patients) and an external validation cohort (60 patients). The following is my main critiques:
1- A small sample size can limit the power of the study to detect significant differences and may
increase the margin of error. In addition, there is a risk of overfitting the model, which may not
perform well in different or larger populations.
2- The 5-year survival rate difference between well-nourished and malnourished patients
(97.78% vs. 85.00%) suggests a significant impact of nutritional status on survival. However,
the lack of details on other potentially influential factors (such as cancer stage, comorbidities,
and treatment variations) makes it hard to attribute differences solely to nutritional status.
3- The inclusion of CRP as an inflammatory marker significantly improved model sensitivity
and specificity. However, the study lacks a comparative analysis of other potential inflammatory
markers, limiting the understanding of whether CRP is the best choice.
Please review this paper.
user
Title: A modified GLIM criteria-based nomogram for the survival prediction of Gastric Cancer
Patients undergoing Surgical Resection
Version: 2 Date: 20 Jul 2024
Reviewer:  Mohamed Ibrahim
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for giving me the opportunity to review this Retrospective cohort study on 210
patients undergoing radical resection for gastric cancer, divided into a development cohort (150
patients) and an external validation cohort (60 patients). The following is my main critiques:
1- A small sample size can limit the power of the study to detect significant differences and may
increase the margin of error. In addition, there is a risk of overfitting the model, which may not
perform well in different or larger populations.
2- The 5-year survival rate difference between well-nourished and malnourished patients
(97.78% vs. 85.00%) suggests a significant impact of nutritional status on survival. However,
the lack of details on other potentially influential factors (such as cancer stage, comorbidities,
and treatment variations) makes it hard to attribute differences solely to nutritional status.
3- The inclusion of CRP as an inflammatory marker significantly improved model sensitivity
and specificity. However, the study lacks a comparative analysis of other potential inflammatory
markers, limiting the understanding of whether CRP is the best choice.
assistant