Title: A Comprehensive Study on Non-Cancer-Related Mortality Risk Factors in Elderly
Gastric Cancer Patients Post-Curative Surgery
Version: 2 Date: 13 Dec 2023
Reviewer:  Chikara Kunisaki
Reviewer's report:
Major comments
The topic of this study is interesting and important. However, there are some ambiguous and
insufficient data. Some data are also missing.
I wonder there were some studies dealing with same topic. What is new and different?
It is more useful to show clinically available suggestions based on the present study.
Minor comments
1. A total of 684 patients underwent curative resection. However, non-curative resection was
excluded from the study. Were patients without curative resection included in 684 patients?
In Results section, Of the 689 patients diagnosed with pStageI-III gastric cancer during the study
tenure, 603 underwent curative resection.
It is so confused. Please comprehensively describe this issue.
2. Please clearly and concisely describe the method of multivariate analysis.
3. Please clearly define the pneumonia and respiratory failure. What is the difference between
the two groups?
4. P9 L5, those who perished from other ailments.
Please concretely describe this. I wonder it is better to describe “non-cancer-related death” to
improv the readability.
5. What is the duration after surgery in alive patients without recurrence? It is necessary to
strictly define the follow-up time after surgery without recurrence. If the follow-up time is
longer, recurrence would be detected in a subset of population.
6. Authors used “overall complications” as a risk factor. I wonder many readers want to know
the correlation of > C-D II or III complications and non-cancer related death. Please re-analyze
this issue.
7. In general, it is important to avoid the repetition of the contents in the text, which is shown
in the tables. Authors frequently repeated the same contents in the text. Therefore, it is better to
summarize the important points in the text.
8. In Discussion section, authors mentioned about the superiority of minimally invasive surgery.
However, authors could not show the advantages of this approach in this study. It is necessary
to discuss the reason why there was no difference in this study.
9. P12, L2-4, In the context of our study, integrating CGA ------ directed interventions to alleviate
these risks.
We need more concrete suggestions. What can we clinically perform in daily practice according
to the results of this study?
10. Conclusion is not based on the outcomes of this study. This is like a textbook description. It
is necessary to conclude something new future perspectives based on the results of this study.
11. The information of adjuvant chemotherapy is important. Please show us this issue.
Title: A Comprehensive Study on Non-Cancer-Related Mortality Risk Factors in Elderly
Gastric Cancer Patients Post-Curative Surgery
Version: 2 Date: 13 Dec 2023
Reviewer:  Chikara Kunisaki
Reviewer's report:
Major comments
The topic of this study is interesting and important. However, there are some ambiguous and
insufficient data. Some data are also missing.
I wonder there were some studies dealing with same topic. What is new and different?
It is more useful to show clinically available suggestions based on the present study.
Minor comments
1. A total of 684 patients underwent curative resection. However, non-curative resection was
excluded from the study. Were patients without curative resection included in 684 patients?
In Results section, Of the 689 patients diagnosed with pStageI-III gastric cancer during the study
tenure, 603 underwent curative resection.
It is so confused. Please comprehensively describe this issue.
2. Please clearly and concisely describe the method of multivariate analysis.
3. Please clearly define the pneumonia and respiratory failure. What is the difference between
the two groups?
4. P9 L5, those who perished from other ailments.
Please concretely describe this. I wonder it is better to describe “non-cancer-related death” to
improv the readability.
5. What is the duration after surgery in alive patients without recurrence? It is necessary to
strictly define the follow-up time after surgery without recurrence. If the follow-up time is
longer, recurrence would be detected in a subset of population.
6. Authors used “overall complications” as a risk factor. I wonder many readers want to know
the correlation of > C-D II or III complications and non-cancer related death. Please re-analyze
this issue.
7. In general, it is important to avoid the repetition of the contents in the text, which is shown
in the tables. Authors frequently repeated the same contents in the text. Therefore, it is better to
summarize the important points in the text.
8. In Discussion section, authors mentioned about the superiority of minimally invasive surgery.
However, authors could not show the advantages of this approach in this study. It is necessary
to discuss the reason why there was no difference in this study.
9. P12, L2-4, In the context of our study, integrating CGA ------ directed interventions to alleviate
these risks.
We need more concrete suggestions. What can we clinically perform in daily practice according
to the results of this study?
10. Conclusion is not based on the outcomes of this study. This is like a textbook description. It
is necessary to conclude something new future perspectives based on the results of this study.
11. The information of adjuvant chemotherapy is important. Please show us this issue.
Please review this paper.
user
Title: A Comprehensive Study on Non-Cancer-Related Mortality Risk Factors in Elderly
Gastric Cancer Patients Post-Curative Surgery
Version: 2 Date: 13 Dec 2023
Reviewer:  Chikara Kunisaki
Reviewer's report:
Major comments
The topic of this study is interesting and important. However, there are some ambiguous and
insufficient data. Some data are also missing.
I wonder there were some studies dealing with same topic. What is new and different?
It is more useful to show clinically available suggestions based on the present study.
Minor comments
1. A total of 684 patients underwent curative resection. However, non-curative resection was
excluded from the study. Were patients without curative resection included in 684 patients?
In Results section, Of the 689 patients diagnosed with pStageI-III gastric cancer during the study
tenure, 603 underwent curative resection.
It is so confused. Please comprehensively describe this issue.
2. Please clearly and concisely describe the method of multivariate analysis.
3. Please clearly define the pneumonia and respiratory failure. What is the difference between
the two groups?
4. P9 L5, those who perished from other ailments.
Please concretely describe this. I wonder it is better to describe “non-cancer-related death” to
improv the readability.
5. What is the duration after surgery in alive patients without recurrence? It is necessary to
strictly define the follow-up time after surgery without recurrence. If the follow-up time is
longer, recurrence would be detected in a subset of population.
6. Authors used “overall complications” as a risk factor. I wonder many readers want to know
the correlation of > C-D II or III complications and non-cancer related death. Please re-analyze
this issue.
7. In general, it is important to avoid the repetition of the contents in the text, which is shown
in the tables. Authors frequently repeated the same contents in the text. Therefore, it is better to
summarize the important points in the text.
8. In Discussion section, authors mentioned about the superiority of minimally invasive surgery.
However, authors could not show the advantages of this approach in this study. It is necessary
to discuss the reason why there was no difference in this study.
9. P12, L2-4, In the context of our study, integrating CGA ------ directed interventions to alleviate
these risks.
We need more concrete suggestions. What can we clinically perform in daily practice according
to the results of this study?
10. Conclusion is not based on the outcomes of this study. This is like a textbook description. It
is necessary to conclude something new future perspectives based on the results of this study.
11. The information of adjuvant chemotherapy is important. Please show us this issue.
assistant