Title: Correlation between KRAS and NRAS mutational status and clinicopathological features
in 414 cases of metastatic colorectal cancer in Morocco: the largest North African case series
Version: 2 Date: 18 Nov 2022
Reviewer's report:
The manuscript entitled “Correlation between KRAS and NRAS mutational status and
clinicopathological features in 414 cases of metastatic colorectal cancer in Morocco: the largest
North African case series: investigated the KRAS and NRAS mutational status in colorectal
cancer in North African. Given the large case number, it is an interesting project, but there are
many issues to be addressed regarding study design and writing styles.
1. What samples were submitted for the PCR analysis? How many are primary tumor vs.
metastatic cancer? If metastatic, how did the authors make sure that they are truly colorectal
primary?
2. Three cases of small cell neuroendocrine carcinoma are included. In my opinion, pure small
cell carcinoma in colorectum is extremely rare. Can the authors confirm the diagnosis before
including them for analysis? Also, histology pictures are needed to see how they define the
adenocarcinoma to be mucinous, NOS, or small cell.
3. Is there any prognostic difference between the KRAS/NRAS mutated vs. wild-type cancers?
Any survival data? In another words, what is the significance of this study and what new
information can it bring to the medical world rather than “being the largest study in North
African?”
4. There are also many writing style issues: 1. The abstract is lengthy and wordy with many
unnecessary information. 2. The main text needs to be phrased with organized paragraphs. 3.
“Primitive tumor” should be “primary tumor”, etc.
Title: Correlation between KRAS and NRAS mutational status and clinicopathological features
in 414 cases of metastatic colorectal cancer in Morocco: the largest North African case series
Version: 2 Date: 18 Nov 2022
Reviewer's report:
The manuscript entitled “Correlation between KRAS and NRAS mutational status and
clinicopathological features in 414 cases of metastatic colorectal cancer in Morocco: the largest
North African case series: investigated the KRAS and NRAS mutational status in colorectal
cancer in North African. Given the large case number, it is an interesting project, but there are
many issues to be addressed regarding study design and writing styles.
1. What samples were submitted for the PCR analysis? How many are primary tumor vs.
metastatic cancer? If metastatic, how did the authors make sure that they are truly colorectal
primary?
2. Three cases of small cell neuroendocrine carcinoma are included. In my opinion, pure small
cell carcinoma in colorectum is extremely rare. Can the authors confirm the diagnosis before
including them for analysis? Also, histology pictures are needed to see how they define the
adenocarcinoma to be mucinous, NOS, or small cell.
3. Is there any prognostic difference between the KRAS/NRAS mutated vs. wild-type cancers?
Any survival data? In another words, what is the significance of this study and what new
information can it bring to the medical world rather than “being the largest study in North
African?”
4. There are also many writing style issues: 1. The abstract is lengthy and wordy with many
unnecessary information. 2. The main text needs to be phrased with organized paragraphs. 3.
“Primitive tumor” should be “primary tumor”, etc.
Please review this paper.
user
Title: Correlation between KRAS and NRAS mutational status and clinicopathological features
in 414 cases of metastatic colorectal cancer in Morocco: the largest North African case series
Version: 2 Date: 18 Nov 2022
Reviewer's report:
The manuscript entitled “Correlation between KRAS and NRAS mutational status and
clinicopathological features in 414 cases of metastatic colorectal cancer in Morocco: the largest
North African case series: investigated the KRAS and NRAS mutational status in colorectal
cancer in North African. Given the large case number, it is an interesting project, but there are
many issues to be addressed regarding study design and writing styles.
1. What samples were submitted for the PCR analysis? How many are primary tumor vs.
metastatic cancer? If metastatic, how did the authors make sure that they are truly colorectal
primary?
2. Three cases of small cell neuroendocrine carcinoma are included. In my opinion, pure small
cell carcinoma in colorectum is extremely rare. Can the authors confirm the diagnosis before
including them for analysis? Also, histology pictures are needed to see how they define the
adenocarcinoma to be mucinous, NOS, or small cell.
3. Is there any prognostic difference between the KRAS/NRAS mutated vs. wild-type cancers?
Any survival data? In another words, what is the significance of this study and what new
information can it bring to the medical world rather than “being the largest study in North
African?”
4. There are also many writing style issues: 1. The abstract is lengthy and wordy with many
unnecessary information. 2. The main text needs to be phrased with organized paragraphs. 3.
“Primitive tumor” should be “primary tumor”, etc.
assistant