Title: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy with or without PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors in resectable
esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a meta-analysis based on randomized controlled trials
Version: 0 Date: 16 Apr 2025
Reviewer's report:
In this study, the authors conducted a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs)
that assessed neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NC) and neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy (NIC)
for resectable esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. The aim was to evaluate NIC's potential
risks and clinical benefits compared to NC.
The findings indicated that NIC significantly improved pathological complete response
(pCR) rates and major pathological response (MPR) compared to NC. Additionally, NIC
positively affected overall survival (OS) and event-free survival (EFS). However, the NIC
group experienced a significantly higher incidence of immune-related adverse events (irAEs)
compared to the NC group. Notably, the incidence of Grade 3-4 irAEs was not significantly
different between the two groups.
We believe that exploring the efficacy of preoperative treatments, including immune checkpoint
inhibitors (ICI) alongside conventional preoperative treatments, is an important area for future
research. Overall, the paper is well-written in terms of language, syntax, and tense; however,
some issues need to be addressed.
1.
The Methods section should clearly state the definition of OS and EFS.
2.
The methods section should provide detailed preoperative neoadjuvant therapy protocols.
3.
Although the pCR and MPR rates were higher in the NIC group than in the NC group, the
number of lymph nodes harvested was significantly higher in the NIC group, potentially leading
to better survival. The question arises as to whether there was any difference in the quality of
surgical procedures between the two groups. What do the authors think about this question?
Title: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy with or without PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors in resectable
esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a meta-analysis based on randomized controlled trials
Version: 0 Date: 16 Apr 2025
Reviewer's report:
In this study, the authors conducted a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs)
that assessed neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NC) and neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy (NIC)
for resectable esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. The aim was to evaluate NIC's potential
risks and clinical benefits compared to NC.
The findings indicated that NIC significantly improved pathological complete response
(pCR) rates and major pathological response (MPR) compared to NC. Additionally, NIC
positively affected overall survival (OS) and event-free survival (EFS). However, the NIC
group experienced a significantly higher incidence of immune-related adverse events (irAEs)
compared to the NC group. Notably, the incidence of Grade 3-4 irAEs was not significantly
different between the two groups.
We believe that exploring the efficacy of preoperative treatments, including immune checkpoint
inhibitors (ICI) alongside conventional preoperative treatments, is an important area for future
research. Overall, the paper is well-written in terms of language, syntax, and tense; however,
some issues need to be addressed.
1.
The Methods section should clearly state the definition of OS and EFS.
2.
The methods section should provide detailed preoperative neoadjuvant therapy protocols.
3.
Although the pCR and MPR rates were higher in the NIC group than in the NC group, the
number of lymph nodes harvested was significantly higher in the NIC group, potentially leading
to better survival. The question arises as to whether there was any difference in the quality of
surgical procedures between the two groups. What do the authors think about this question?
Please review this paper.
user
Title: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy with or without PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors in resectable
esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a meta-analysis based on randomized controlled trials
Version: 0 Date: 16 Apr 2025
Reviewer's report:
In this study, the authors conducted a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs)
that assessed neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NC) and neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy (NIC)
for resectable esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. The aim was to evaluate NIC's potential
risks and clinical benefits compared to NC.
The findings indicated that NIC significantly improved pathological complete response
(pCR) rates and major pathological response (MPR) compared to NC. Additionally, NIC
positively affected overall survival (OS) and event-free survival (EFS). However, the NIC
group experienced a significantly higher incidence of immune-related adverse events (irAEs)
compared to the NC group. Notably, the incidence of Grade 3-4 irAEs was not significantly
different between the two groups.
We believe that exploring the efficacy of preoperative treatments, including immune checkpoint
inhibitors (ICI) alongside conventional preoperative treatments, is an important area for future
research. Overall, the paper is well-written in terms of language, syntax, and tense; however,
some issues need to be addressed.
1.
The Methods section should clearly state the definition of OS and EFS.
2.
The methods section should provide detailed preoperative neoadjuvant therapy protocols.
3.
Although the pCR and MPR rates were higher in the NIC group than in the NC group, the
number of lymph nodes harvested was significantly higher in the NIC group, potentially leading
to better survival. The question arises as to whether there was any difference in the quality of
surgical procedures between the two groups. What do the authors think about this question?
assistant