Title: Nomogram for predicting early cancer-related death due to recurrence after liver resection
in hepatocellular carcinoma patients with Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) stage B/C: a
multicenter study
Version: 1 Date: 11 Nov 2024
Reviewer's report:
In this study, the authors developed a nomogram model based on the alpha-fetoprotein-tumor
burden score, BCLC stage, and aspartate aminotransferase/alanine aminotransferase ratio for
the prediction of early cancer-related deaths due to postoperative recurrence by analyzing
the data of 672 patients with stage B/C hepatocellular carcinoma of BCLC. The model
demonstrated good predictive ability and clinical application in both training and validation
cohorts, helping surgeons avoid unnecessary liver resection in treatment decisions. Overall, the
paper is technically sound, and the experimental data largely supports the authors' conclusions.
The author's description of the article's limitations at the end is detailed enough, but I'd still like
to add a few points.
Why choose a training cohort and a validation cohort at a ratio of 6:4. It seems that 70% training
cohort and 30% validation cohort are common choices for cases where the amount of data is
small.
In Discussion I noticed that the author mentioned many interesting studies by other scholars (The
paragraph preceding “Notably, the ERCD …. in previous investigations.”), which is reasonable,
but why not cite them, I think these citations are necessary. This will not only support your
argument but also show the reader that you know in the field.
The author's English needs to be improved, especially when switching between topics. Please
avoid the continuous use of "however", If "however" is used too frequently, it may give the
impression of a single structure and repetitive expressions in the paper, leading to a somewhat
monotonous reading of the article and giving the impression of incoherence or lack of clear
logic. This may affect the overall flow and persuasiveness of the paper.
Title: Nomogram for predicting early cancer-related death due to recurrence after liver resection
in hepatocellular carcinoma patients with Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) stage B/C: a
multicenter study
Version: 1 Date: 11 Nov 2024
Reviewer's report:
In this study, the authors developed a nomogram model based on the alpha-fetoprotein-tumor
burden score, BCLC stage, and aspartate aminotransferase/alanine aminotransferase ratio for
the prediction of early cancer-related deaths due to postoperative recurrence by analyzing
the data of 672 patients with stage B/C hepatocellular carcinoma of BCLC. The model
demonstrated good predictive ability and clinical application in both training and validation
cohorts, helping surgeons avoid unnecessary liver resection in treatment decisions. Overall, the
paper is technically sound, and the experimental data largely supports the authors' conclusions.
The author's description of the article's limitations at the end is detailed enough, but I'd still like
to add a few points.
Why choose a training cohort and a validation cohort at a ratio of 6:4. It seems that 70% training
cohort and 30% validation cohort are common choices for cases where the amount of data is
small.
In Discussion I noticed that the author mentioned many interesting studies by other scholars (The
paragraph preceding “Notably, the ERCD …. in previous investigations.”), which is reasonable,
but why not cite them, I think these citations are necessary. This will not only support your
argument but also show the reader that you know in the field.
The author's English needs to be improved, especially when switching between topics. Please
avoid the continuous use of "however", If "however" is used too frequently, it may give the
impression of a single structure and repetitive expressions in the paper, leading to a somewhat
monotonous reading of the article and giving the impression of incoherence or lack of clear
logic. This may affect the overall flow and persuasiveness of the paper.
Please review this paper.
user
Title: Nomogram for predicting early cancer-related death due to recurrence after liver resection
in hepatocellular carcinoma patients with Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) stage B/C: a
multicenter study
Version: 1 Date: 11 Nov 2024
Reviewer's report:
In this study, the authors developed a nomogram model based on the alpha-fetoprotein-tumor
burden score, BCLC stage, and aspartate aminotransferase/alanine aminotransferase ratio for
the prediction of early cancer-related deaths due to postoperative recurrence by analyzing
the data of 672 patients with stage B/C hepatocellular carcinoma of BCLC. The model
demonstrated good predictive ability and clinical application in both training and validation
cohorts, helping surgeons avoid unnecessary liver resection in treatment decisions. Overall, the
paper is technically sound, and the experimental data largely supports the authors' conclusions.
The author's description of the article's limitations at the end is detailed enough, but I'd still like
to add a few points.
Why choose a training cohort and a validation cohort at a ratio of 6:4. It seems that 70% training
cohort and 30% validation cohort are common choices for cases where the amount of data is
small.
In Discussion I noticed that the author mentioned many interesting studies by other scholars (The
paragraph preceding “Notably, the ERCD …. in previous investigations.”), which is reasonable,
but why not cite them, I think these citations are necessary. This will not only support your
argument but also show the reader that you know in the field.
The author's English needs to be improved, especially when switching between topics. Please
avoid the continuous use of "however", If "however" is used too frequently, it may give the
impression of a single structure and repetitive expressions in the paper, leading to a somewhat
monotonous reading of the article and giving the impression of incoherence or lack of clear
logic. This may affect the overall flow and persuasiveness of the paper.
assistant