Reviewer's report
Title:Design and rationale of the HCC BRIDGE study in China: a longitudinal,
multicenter cohort trial in hepatocellular carcinoma
Version: 1Date:30 March 2011
Reviewer: Francisco Gude
Reviewer's report:
The present manuscript is a prospective large scale study including patients
newly diagnosed with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The study may give a
broader understanding of current treatment approaches to HCC and associated
clinical outcomes.
However it is an observational study, not a randomized clinical trial. In addition,
patients treated during the period when sorafenib was not available will act as
historic controls. Therefore the authors should be cautious about their
conclusions when comparing sorafenib versus other therapies.
Statistical analyses are adequate, with the exception that the authors do not
explain the estimates for the sample size. It is supposed that 9000 patients is a
big sample. Why 9000?
In relation to the STROBE Statement: All items have been included.
I still find the manuscript worth publishing since such large scale studies are very
difficult to perform, time consuming and may help to improve clinical studies on
cancer.
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: Yes, and I have assessed the statistics in my report.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests
Reviewer's report
Title:Design and rationale of the HCC BRIDGE study in China: a longitudinal,
multicenter cohort trial in hepatocellular carcinoma
Version: 1Date:30 March 2011
Reviewer: Francisco Gude
Reviewer's report:
The present manuscript is a prospective large scale study including patients
newly diagnosed with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The study may give a
broader understanding of current treatment approaches to HCC and associated
clinical outcomes.
However it is an observational study, not a randomized clinical trial. In addition,
patients treated during the period when sorafenib was not available will act as
historic controls. Therefore the authors should be cautious about their
conclusions when comparing sorafenib versus other therapies.
Statistical analyses are adequate, with the exception that the authors do not
explain the estimates for the sample size. It is supposed that 9000 patients is a
big sample. Why 9000?
In relation to the STROBE Statement: All items have been included.
I still find the manuscript worth publishing since such large scale studies are very
difficult to perform, time consuming and may help to improve clinical studies on
cancer.
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: Yes, and I have assessed the statistics in my report.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests
Please review this paper.
user
Reviewer's report
Title:Design and rationale of the HCC BRIDGE study in China: a longitudinal,
multicenter cohort trial in hepatocellular carcinoma
Version: 1Date:30 March 2011
Reviewer: Francisco Gude
Reviewer's report:
The present manuscript is a prospective large scale study including patients
newly diagnosed with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The study may give a
broader understanding of current treatment approaches to HCC and associated
clinical outcomes.
However it is an observational study, not a randomized clinical trial. In addition,
patients treated during the period when sorafenib was not available will act as
historic controls. Therefore the authors should be cautious about their
conclusions when comparing sorafenib versus other therapies.
Statistical analyses are adequate, with the exception that the authors do not
explain the estimates for the sample size. It is supposed that 9000 patients is a
big sample. Why 9000?
In relation to the STROBE Statement: All items have been included.
I still find the manuscript worth publishing since such large scale studies are very
difficult to perform, time consuming and may help to improve clinical studies on
cancer.
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: Yes, and I have assessed the statistics in my report.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests
assistant