Title: The prognostic significance of tumor-specific growth factor in colorectal cancer: An
observation study
Version: 3 Date: 06 Apr 2025
Reviewer's report:
The revised manuscript presents a well-structured and relevant retrospective cohort study
assessing the prognostic value of serum tumor-specific growth factor (TSGF) in patients with
stage I–III colorectal cancer. The authors have adequately addressed the key methodological
and interpretative concerns raised in the initial round of review.
Strengths of the manuscript:
The study is based on a large patient cohort (n=2223), which increases the statistical power of
the analysis.
The inclusion of TSGF as a prognostic biomarker is clinically relevant and offers potential
utility, especially in settings where low-cost and easily accessible markers are essential.
The authors have clarified the methodology, added essential details regarding ethics approval,
assay technique, and statistical analysis, and restructured the discussion to better contextualize
findings within the existing literature.
Suggestions for improvement:
Introduction and Background: Consider briefly mentioning the current limitations of CEA and
CA19-9 as prognostic markers earlier in the introduction to better justify the need for exploring
TSGF.
Results: It may be helpful to include a clearer summary paragraph at the end of the Results
section to highlight the main findings before moving into the Discussion.
Clinical relevance: While the clinical utility of TSGF is mentioned in the Discussion, further
elaboration on how it could be practically integrated into existing CRC risk stratification or
follow-up protocols would strengthen the impact of the study.
Language: Although the manuscript is mostly well-written, a final proofread by a native English
speaker or professional editing service is recommended to improve fluency and polish.
Conclusion:
The authors have responded thoughtfully and thoroughly to previous reviewer comments. The
revised version substantially improves clarity, methodological transparency, and the framing
of results. With minor editorial adjustments and clarification of clinical implications, the
manuscript will be suitable for publication.
Title: The prognostic significance of tumor-specific growth factor in colorectal cancer: An
observation study
Version: 3 Date: 06 Apr 2025
Reviewer's report:
The revised manuscript presents a well-structured and relevant retrospective cohort study
assessing the prognostic value of serum tumor-specific growth factor (TSGF) in patients with
stage I–III colorectal cancer. The authors have adequately addressed the key methodological
and interpretative concerns raised in the initial round of review.
Strengths of the manuscript:
The study is based on a large patient cohort (n=2223), which increases the statistical power of
the analysis.
The inclusion of TSGF as a prognostic biomarker is clinically relevant and offers potential
utility, especially in settings where low-cost and easily accessible markers are essential.
The authors have clarified the methodology, added essential details regarding ethics approval,
assay technique, and statistical analysis, and restructured the discussion to better contextualize
findings within the existing literature.
Suggestions for improvement:
Introduction and Background: Consider briefly mentioning the current limitations of CEA and
CA19-9 as prognostic markers earlier in the introduction to better justify the need for exploring
TSGF.
Results: It may be helpful to include a clearer summary paragraph at the end of the Results
section to highlight the main findings before moving into the Discussion.
Clinical relevance: While the clinical utility of TSGF is mentioned in the Discussion, further
elaboration on how it could be practically integrated into existing CRC risk stratification or
follow-up protocols would strengthen the impact of the study.
Language: Although the manuscript is mostly well-written, a final proofread by a native English
speaker or professional editing service is recommended to improve fluency and polish.
Conclusion:
The authors have responded thoughtfully and thoroughly to previous reviewer comments. The
revised version substantially improves clarity, methodological transparency, and the framing
of results. With minor editorial adjustments and clarification of clinical implications, the
manuscript will be suitable for publication.
Please review this paper.
user
Title: The prognostic significance of tumor-specific growth factor in colorectal cancer: An
observation study
Version: 3 Date: 06 Apr 2025
Reviewer's report:
The revised manuscript presents a well-structured and relevant retrospective cohort study
assessing the prognostic value of serum tumor-specific growth factor (TSGF) in patients with
stage I–III colorectal cancer. The authors have adequately addressed the key methodological
and interpretative concerns raised in the initial round of review.
Strengths of the manuscript:
The study is based on a large patient cohort (n=2223), which increases the statistical power of
the analysis.
The inclusion of TSGF as a prognostic biomarker is clinically relevant and offers potential
utility, especially in settings where low-cost and easily accessible markers are essential.
The authors have clarified the methodology, added essential details regarding ethics approval,
assay technique, and statistical analysis, and restructured the discussion to better contextualize
findings within the existing literature.
Suggestions for improvement:
Introduction and Background: Consider briefly mentioning the current limitations of CEA and
CA19-9 as prognostic markers earlier in the introduction to better justify the need for exploring
TSGF.
Results: It may be helpful to include a clearer summary paragraph at the end of the Results
section to highlight the main findings before moving into the Discussion.
Clinical relevance: While the clinical utility of TSGF is mentioned in the Discussion, further
elaboration on how it could be practically integrated into existing CRC risk stratification or
follow-up protocols would strengthen the impact of the study.
Language: Although the manuscript is mostly well-written, a final proofread by a native English
speaker or professional editing service is recommended to improve fluency and polish.
Conclusion:
The authors have responded thoughtfully and thoroughly to previous reviewer comments. The
revised version substantially improves clarity, methodological transparency, and the framing
of results. With minor editorial adjustments and clarification of clinical implications, the
manuscript will be suitable for publication.
assistant