Title: Efficacy and safety of the combination of camrelizumab and apatinib in the treatment of
liver cancer: a systematic review and single-arm meta-analysis
Version: 0 Date: 04 Dec 2023
Reviewer's report:
• The authors would better to specify the inclusion criteria for the studies selected in the meta-
analysis. Readers need to know the characteristics of the studies included to understand the
generalizability of your findings.
• The authors would better to provide more details about the MINORS tool used for evaluating
the quality of included studies. Specify the criteria assessed and mention any limitations of the
tool.
• Please clarify the statistical methods used in the meta-analysis. Explain any heterogeneity
among studies and how it was addressed.
• While the results are presented comprehensively, consider using a more structured format. For
example, create a table summarizing key findings such as ORR, DCR, mPFS, mOS, and adverse
events for easier reference.
• It's noted that the prevalence of adverse events is 87%, and the occurrence of grade 3 or higher
adverse events is 35%. However, the confidence intervals for these estimates seem unusual (95%
CI: 63%-102% and 95% CI: -1%-71%). Verify and correct if necessary.
• The authors should enhance the readability in language. For instance, "prevalence of adverse
events" might be better replaced with "incidence of adverse events."
• The conclusion mentions exercising vigilance concerning potential adverse reactions.
Elaborate on specific recommendations for clinical practice or further research based on your
findings.
• Check the spelling of "Carilizumab" in the keywords; it seems to be a typographical error and
should likely be "Camrelizumab."
Title: Efficacy and safety of the combination of camrelizumab and apatinib in the treatment of
liver cancer: a systematic review and single-arm meta-analysis
Version: 0 Date: 04 Dec 2023
Reviewer's report:
• The authors would better to specify the inclusion criteria for the studies selected in the meta-
analysis. Readers need to know the characteristics of the studies included to understand the
generalizability of your findings.
• The authors would better to provide more details about the MINORS tool used for evaluating
the quality of included studies. Specify the criteria assessed and mention any limitations of the
tool.
• Please clarify the statistical methods used in the meta-analysis. Explain any heterogeneity
among studies and how it was addressed.
• While the results are presented comprehensively, consider using a more structured format. For
example, create a table summarizing key findings such as ORR, DCR, mPFS, mOS, and adverse
events for easier reference.
• It's noted that the prevalence of adverse events is 87%, and the occurrence of grade 3 or higher
adverse events is 35%. However, the confidence intervals for these estimates seem unusual (95%
CI: 63%-102% and 95% CI: -1%-71%). Verify and correct if necessary.
• The authors should enhance the readability in language. For instance, "prevalence of adverse
events" might be better replaced with "incidence of adverse events."
• The conclusion mentions exercising vigilance concerning potential adverse reactions.
Elaborate on specific recommendations for clinical practice or further research based on your
findings.
• Check the spelling of "Carilizumab" in the keywords; it seems to be a typographical error and
should likely be "Camrelizumab."
Please review this paper.
user
Title: Efficacy and safety of the combination of camrelizumab and apatinib in the treatment of
liver cancer: a systematic review and single-arm meta-analysis
Version: 0 Date: 04 Dec 2023
Reviewer's report:
• The authors would better to specify the inclusion criteria for the studies selected in the meta-
analysis. Readers need to know the characteristics of the studies included to understand the
generalizability of your findings.
• The authors would better to provide more details about the MINORS tool used for evaluating
the quality of included studies. Specify the criteria assessed and mention any limitations of the
tool.
• Please clarify the statistical methods used in the meta-analysis. Explain any heterogeneity
among studies and how it was addressed.
• While the results are presented comprehensively, consider using a more structured format. For
example, create a table summarizing key findings such as ORR, DCR, mPFS, mOS, and adverse
events for easier reference.
• It's noted that the prevalence of adverse events is 87%, and the occurrence of grade 3 or higher
adverse events is 35%. However, the confidence intervals for these estimates seem unusual (95%
CI: 63%-102% and 95% CI: -1%-71%). Verify and correct if necessary.
• The authors should enhance the readability in language. For instance, "prevalence of adverse
events" might be better replaced with "incidence of adverse events."
• The conclusion mentions exercising vigilance concerning potential adverse reactions.
Elaborate on specific recommendations for clinical practice or further research based on your
findings.
• Check the spelling of "Carilizumab" in the keywords; it seems to be a typographical error and
should likely be "Camrelizumab."
assistant