Title: Capecitabine enhances sensitivity to oxaliplatin in advanced gastric cancer and the effects
on patients' FOXP1 and GGT levels
Version: 0 Date: 24 Nov 2024
Reviewer:  Panagiotis Tsibouris
Reviewer's report:
Abstract It should be defined whether they were consecutive patients Numerical values about
the study population would be better presented in the results What was the effect of treatment
reported in the first sentence of the results Was it complete and partial response or was stable
disease included as well? Quantitative measurements of FOXP1 would be better to accompany
p-values OS rates should be followed by p-values Significant factors determining OS should be
presented in one instead of two sentences and followed by OR and p-value Methods Numerical
values for the study population belong in the results It is stated that patients are diagnosed for
the first time but it is also stated that patients might have reoccure after surgery This point
needs futher definition It should be defined at what point an imbalance of various organ function
was acceptable since it mentioned that "is generaly normal " and also it is mentioned that
diabetes , heart, liver and kidney comorbidities were excluded  It should be stated whether
mixed neoplasms of the stomach were excluded Was the study FOLFOX vs capecitabine or
FOLFOX  vs FOLFOX+capecitabine? The latter is mentioned in the results but it is not clear
in methods section Quantitation of FOXP1 expression should be provided  At what time point
was efficacy  measured? Grading of adverse reactions should be described Statistics Power of
the study calculation should be provided Results Because FOXP1 was mentioned it is graded
between 0 and 3 , were any cases with grade higher than 1 Table 2 gives the impression that are
none Grading of adverse reactions should be provided Significant determinants of OS should
be icluded in the text followed by OR and p-value Corrected OR after multivariated analysis
should be presented I am not sure that pair presentation of OS in various subgroups is needed
Title: Capecitabine enhances sensitivity to oxaliplatin in advanced gastric cancer and the effects
on patients' FOXP1 and GGT levels
Version: 0 Date: 24 Nov 2024
Reviewer:  Panagiotis Tsibouris
Reviewer's report:
Abstract It should be defined whether they were consecutive patients Numerical values about
the study population would be better presented in the results What was the effect of treatment
reported in the first sentence of the results Was it complete and partial response or was stable
disease included as well? Quantitative measurements of FOXP1 would be better to accompany
p-values OS rates should be followed by p-values Significant factors determining OS should be
presented in one instead of two sentences and followed by OR and p-value Methods Numerical
values for the study population belong in the results It is stated that patients are diagnosed for
the first time but it is also stated that patients might have reoccure after surgery This point
needs futher definition It should be defined at what point an imbalance of various organ function
was acceptable since it mentioned that "is generaly normal " and also it is mentioned that
diabetes , heart, liver and kidney comorbidities were excluded  It should be stated whether
mixed neoplasms of the stomach were excluded Was the study FOLFOX vs capecitabine or
FOLFOX  vs FOLFOX+capecitabine? The latter is mentioned in the results but it is not clear
in methods section Quantitation of FOXP1 expression should be provided  At what time point
was efficacy  measured? Grading of adverse reactions should be described Statistics Power of
the study calculation should be provided Results Because FOXP1 was mentioned it is graded
between 0 and 3 , were any cases with grade higher than 1 Table 2 gives the impression that are
none Grading of adverse reactions should be provided Significant determinants of OS should
be icluded in the text followed by OR and p-value Corrected OR after multivariated analysis
should be presented I am not sure that pair presentation of OS in various subgroups is needed
Please review this paper.
user
Title: Capecitabine enhances sensitivity to oxaliplatin in advanced gastric cancer and the effects
on patients' FOXP1 and GGT levels
Version: 0 Date: 24 Nov 2024
Reviewer:  Panagiotis Tsibouris
Reviewer's report:
Abstract It should be defined whether they were consecutive patients Numerical values about
the study population would be better presented in the results What was the effect of treatment
reported in the first sentence of the results Was it complete and partial response or was stable
disease included as well? Quantitative measurements of FOXP1 would be better to accompany
p-values OS rates should be followed by p-values Significant factors determining OS should be
presented in one instead of two sentences and followed by OR and p-value Methods Numerical
values for the study population belong in the results It is stated that patients are diagnosed for
the first time but it is also stated that patients might have reoccure after surgery This point
needs futher definition It should be defined at what point an imbalance of various organ function
was acceptable since it mentioned that "is generaly normal " and also it is mentioned that
diabetes , heart, liver and kidney comorbidities were excluded  It should be stated whether
mixed neoplasms of the stomach were excluded Was the study FOLFOX vs capecitabine or
FOLFOX  vs FOLFOX+capecitabine? The latter is mentioned in the results but it is not clear
in methods section Quantitation of FOXP1 expression should be provided  At what time point
was efficacy  measured? Grading of adverse reactions should be described Statistics Power of
the study calculation should be provided Results Because FOXP1 was mentioned it is graded
between 0 and 3 , were any cases with grade higher than 1 Table 2 gives the impression that are
none Grading of adverse reactions should be provided Significant determinants of OS should
be icluded in the text followed by OR and p-value Corrected OR after multivariated analysis
should be presented I am not sure that pair presentation of OS in various subgroups is needed
assistant