Title: Optimization of Electrode Position in Electric Field Treatment for Pancreatic Cancer
Version: 2 Date: 25 Feb 2025
Reviewer's report:
Overall Impression:
This manuscript presents an interesting and valuable study on optimizing electrode positions
for electric field treatment in pancreatic cancer. The research is well-conducted, and the results
are presented clearly. The study's findings could significantly contribute to improving treatment
efficacy for pancreatic cancer patients. However, there are a few areas that could be improved
or clarified to enhance the manuscript's quality.
Strengths:
Relevance and Significance: The study addresses a critical issue in cancer treatment, specifically
for pancreatic cancer, which has a poor prognosis. The optimization of electrode positions to
enhance electric field treatment could have a significant impact on clinical practice.
Methodology: The use of a 3D treatment planning system and the creation of multiple treatment
plans by rotating the electrode array in different angles provide a comprehensive evaluation of
the effects of electrode position on treatment efficacy. The inclusion of 13 patients adds to the
robustness of the study.
Clear Presentation of Results: The results are presented in a clear and organized manner, with
tables and figures that effectively illustrate the differences between the reference plan and the
trial plans. The percentage improvements in various indices are easy to understand and interpret.
Weaknesses and Suggestions for Improvement:
Limited Sample Size: The study includes only 13 patients, which may limit the generalizability
of the findings. It would be beneficial to include a larger sample size in future studies to confirm
the results.
Lack of Clinical Outcomes: The study focuses on the optimization of electrode positions based
on electric field intensity, but it does not provide information on the actual clinical outcomes,
such as tumor response or patient survival. It would be valuable to include clinical data in future
research to demonstrate the practical benefits of the optimized treatment plans.
Potential for Further Optimization: The study mentions that other optimization methods, such
as conformal electric field application or intensity-modulated electric field application based on
voltage variation, may be superior. It would be interesting to explore these methods in future
studies to further improve treatment efficacy.
Clarity of Figures and Tables: Some of the figures and tables could be improved for better clarity.
For example, the labels and legends in the figures could be made more prominent, and the table
formatting could be adjusted to make the data easier to read.
Discussion of Limitations: The discussion section briefly mentions the limitations of the study,
but it could be expanded to provide a more in-depth analysis of the potential sources of bias and
the implications of these limitations for the study's conclusions.
Title: Optimization of Electrode Position in Electric Field Treatment for Pancreatic Cancer
Version: 2 Date: 25 Feb 2025
Reviewer's report:
Overall Impression:
This manuscript presents an interesting and valuable study on optimizing electrode positions
for electric field treatment in pancreatic cancer. The research is well-conducted, and the results
are presented clearly. The study's findings could significantly contribute to improving treatment
efficacy for pancreatic cancer patients. However, there are a few areas that could be improved
or clarified to enhance the manuscript's quality.
Strengths:
Relevance and Significance: The study addresses a critical issue in cancer treatment, specifically
for pancreatic cancer, which has a poor prognosis. The optimization of electrode positions to
enhance electric field treatment could have a significant impact on clinical practice.
Methodology: The use of a 3D treatment planning system and the creation of multiple treatment
plans by rotating the electrode array in different angles provide a comprehensive evaluation of
the effects of electrode position on treatment efficacy. The inclusion of 13 patients adds to the
robustness of the study.
Clear Presentation of Results: The results are presented in a clear and organized manner, with
tables and figures that effectively illustrate the differences between the reference plan and the
trial plans. The percentage improvements in various indices are easy to understand and interpret.
Weaknesses and Suggestions for Improvement:
Limited Sample Size: The study includes only 13 patients, which may limit the generalizability
of the findings. It would be beneficial to include a larger sample size in future studies to confirm
the results.
Lack of Clinical Outcomes: The study focuses on the optimization of electrode positions based
on electric field intensity, but it does not provide information on the actual clinical outcomes,
such as tumor response or patient survival. It would be valuable to include clinical data in future
research to demonstrate the practical benefits of the optimized treatment plans.
Potential for Further Optimization: The study mentions that other optimization methods, such
as conformal electric field application or intensity-modulated electric field application based on
voltage variation, may be superior. It would be interesting to explore these methods in future
studies to further improve treatment efficacy.
Clarity of Figures and Tables: Some of the figures and tables could be improved for better clarity.
For example, the labels and legends in the figures could be made more prominent, and the table
formatting could be adjusted to make the data easier to read.
Discussion of Limitations: The discussion section briefly mentions the limitations of the study,
but it could be expanded to provide a more in-depth analysis of the potential sources of bias and
the implications of these limitations for the study's conclusions.
Please review this paper.
user
Title: Optimization of Electrode Position in Electric Field Treatment for Pancreatic Cancer
Version: 2 Date: 25 Feb 2025
Reviewer's report:
Overall Impression:
This manuscript presents an interesting and valuable study on optimizing electrode positions
for electric field treatment in pancreatic cancer. The research is well-conducted, and the results
are presented clearly. The study's findings could significantly contribute to improving treatment
efficacy for pancreatic cancer patients. However, there are a few areas that could be improved
or clarified to enhance the manuscript's quality.
Strengths:
Relevance and Significance: The study addresses a critical issue in cancer treatment, specifically
for pancreatic cancer, which has a poor prognosis. The optimization of electrode positions to
enhance electric field treatment could have a significant impact on clinical practice.
Methodology: The use of a 3D treatment planning system and the creation of multiple treatment
plans by rotating the electrode array in different angles provide a comprehensive evaluation of
the effects of electrode position on treatment efficacy. The inclusion of 13 patients adds to the
robustness of the study.
Clear Presentation of Results: The results are presented in a clear and organized manner, with
tables and figures that effectively illustrate the differences between the reference plan and the
trial plans. The percentage improvements in various indices are easy to understand and interpret.
Weaknesses and Suggestions for Improvement:
Limited Sample Size: The study includes only 13 patients, which may limit the generalizability
of the findings. It would be beneficial to include a larger sample size in future studies to confirm
the results.
Lack of Clinical Outcomes: The study focuses on the optimization of electrode positions based
on electric field intensity, but it does not provide information on the actual clinical outcomes,
such as tumor response or patient survival. It would be valuable to include clinical data in future
research to demonstrate the practical benefits of the optimized treatment plans.
Potential for Further Optimization: The study mentions that other optimization methods, such
as conformal electric field application or intensity-modulated electric field application based on
voltage variation, may be superior. It would be interesting to explore these methods in future
studies to further improve treatment efficacy.
Clarity of Figures and Tables: Some of the figures and tables could be improved for better clarity.
For example, the labels and legends in the figures could be made more prominent, and the table
formatting could be adjusted to make the data easier to read.
Discussion of Limitations: The discussion section briefly mentions the limitations of the study,
but it could be expanded to provide a more in-depth analysis of the potential sources of bias and
the implications of these limitations for the study's conclusions.
assistant