Title: Identification of Immune-Related Target and Prognostic Biomarkers in PBMC of
hepatocellular carcinoma
Version: 3 Date: 11 Feb 2023
Reviewer's report:
This paper provides a detailed analysis of the genetic aspects affecting the prognosis of HCC.
This topic is very interesting with regard to the developing possibilities of immunotherapy and
very important in terms of its application in the treatment of HCC.
Abstract
-The abstract should be composed according to the journal guidelines (background, methods...).
Introduction
-The aim of the paper is mentioned only in the discussion. For the sake of clarity, it should be
mentioned in the introduction and abstract.
Results
Some parts of the results are unclear due to the number of factors analysed. In addition, most of
the subsections further elaborate on how the authors obtained their results, including the various
databases which they use. For better clarity, it is worth considering moving this section to the
methodology or shortening it.
-3.1. - The top 10 DEGs included...whats the meaning of "the top" - the most common? the
most relevant?
-3.2. on second lined, three patients are mentioned - these are part of the original cohort (12
patients) or other? In the original cohort there are only BCLC C-D, so how can you analyze
BCLC A,B? If the analysis involves 3 patients, how come 4 BLCL stages are included?
-3.4. - In the text FIG 4a refers to the stage and 4b to the grade of HCC - but this does not
correspond to the attached pictures.
Discussion
-It should be clearly distinguished where the conclusion begins.
Title: Identification of Immune-Related Target and Prognostic Biomarkers in PBMC of
hepatocellular carcinoma
Version: 3 Date: 11 Feb 2023
Reviewer's report:
This paper provides a detailed analysis of the genetic aspects affecting the prognosis of HCC.
This topic is very interesting with regard to the developing possibilities of immunotherapy and
very important in terms of its application in the treatment of HCC.
Abstract
-The abstract should be composed according to the journal guidelines (background, methods...).
Introduction
-The aim of the paper is mentioned only in the discussion. For the sake of clarity, it should be
mentioned in the introduction and abstract.
Results
Some parts of the results are unclear due to the number of factors analysed. In addition, most of
the subsections further elaborate on how the authors obtained their results, including the various
databases which they use. For better clarity, it is worth considering moving this section to the
methodology or shortening it.
-3.1. - The top 10 DEGs included...whats the meaning of "the top" - the most common? the
most relevant?
-3.2. on second lined, three patients are mentioned - these are part of the original cohort (12
patients) or other? In the original cohort there are only BCLC C-D, so how can you analyze
BCLC A,B? If the analysis involves 3 patients, how come 4 BLCL stages are included?
-3.4. - In the text FIG 4a refers to the stage and 4b to the grade of HCC - but this does not
correspond to the attached pictures.
Discussion
-It should be clearly distinguished where the conclusion begins.
Please review this paper.
user
Title: Identification of Immune-Related Target and Prognostic Biomarkers in PBMC of
hepatocellular carcinoma
Version: 3 Date: 11 Feb 2023
Reviewer's report:
This paper provides a detailed analysis of the genetic aspects affecting the prognosis of HCC.
This topic is very interesting with regard to the developing possibilities of immunotherapy and
very important in terms of its application in the treatment of HCC.
Abstract
-The abstract should be composed according to the journal guidelines (background, methods...).
Introduction
-The aim of the paper is mentioned only in the discussion. For the sake of clarity, it should be
mentioned in the introduction and abstract.
Results
Some parts of the results are unclear due to the number of factors analysed. In addition, most of
the subsections further elaborate on how the authors obtained their results, including the various
databases which they use. For better clarity, it is worth considering moving this section to the
methodology or shortening it.
-3.1. - The top 10 DEGs included...whats the meaning of "the top" - the most common? the
most relevant?
-3.2. on second lined, three patients are mentioned - these are part of the original cohort (12
patients) or other? In the original cohort there are only BCLC C-D, so how can you analyze
BCLC A,B? If the analysis involves 3 patients, how come 4 BLCL stages are included?
-3.4. - In the text FIG 4a refers to the stage and 4b to the grade of HCC - but this does not
correspond to the attached pictures.
Discussion
-It should be clearly distinguished where the conclusion begins.
assistant