Title: Investigating the Diagnostic and Prognostic Significance of Genes Related to Fatty Acid
Metabolism in Hepatocellular Carcinoma
Version: 4 Date: 27 Sep 2024
Reviewer's report:
This study indicated a considerable value of specific fatty acid metabolism-related genes in
the diagnostic and prognostic evaluation of hepatocellular carcinoma, which provide novel
insights into the disease's management, as well as has potential implications for personalized
treatment strategies. This study is methodologically sound and logically clear, with appropriate
modifications recommended.
1. Keywords should be further standardised and streamlined.
2. I recommend that the authors include more recent literature in their references. For example,
the authors cite ‘Global cancer statistics 2018/2020’. However, currently ‘Global cancer
statistics 2022: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in
185 countries’ has been published.
3. The authors state "The selection criteria for FAs-DEGs were log (fold-change) values # 0.5
and p-values < 0.05. " . However, p < 0.05 implies that the authors have used only nominal p-
values without multiple hypothesis correction. This is simply wrong. The authors should use
FDR or similar to control false-positive rate.
4. The authors only validated the genes in the model. The validity of the prognostic model should
be further validated in an independent HCC cohort.
5. Previous studies have used similar bioinformatics to develop potential biomarkers (doi:
10.7150/jca.91842; doi: 10.1016/j.tranon.2024.102001). I think it will benefit the reader if the
authors could include some references, which would provide readers with a more complete
understanding of the whole study.
Title: Investigating the Diagnostic and Prognostic Significance of Genes Related to Fatty Acid
Metabolism in Hepatocellular Carcinoma
Version: 4 Date: 27 Sep 2024
Reviewer's report:
This study indicated a considerable value of specific fatty acid metabolism-related genes in
the diagnostic and prognostic evaluation of hepatocellular carcinoma, which provide novel
insights into the disease's management, as well as has potential implications for personalized
treatment strategies. This study is methodologically sound and logically clear, with appropriate
modifications recommended.
1. Keywords should be further standardised and streamlined.
2. I recommend that the authors include more recent literature in their references. For example,
the authors cite ‘Global cancer statistics 2018/2020’. However, currently ‘Global cancer
statistics 2022: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in
185 countries’ has been published.
3. The authors state "The selection criteria for FAs-DEGs were log (fold-change) values # 0.5
and p-values < 0.05. " . However, p < 0.05 implies that the authors have used only nominal p-
values without multiple hypothesis correction. This is simply wrong. The authors should use
FDR or similar to control false-positive rate.
4. The authors only validated the genes in the model. The validity of the prognostic model should
be further validated in an independent HCC cohort.
5. Previous studies have used similar bioinformatics to develop potential biomarkers (doi:
10.7150/jca.91842; doi: 10.1016/j.tranon.2024.102001). I think it will benefit the reader if the
authors could include some references, which would provide readers with a more complete
understanding of the whole study.
Please review this paper.
user
Title: Investigating the Diagnostic and Prognostic Significance of Genes Related to Fatty Acid
Metabolism in Hepatocellular Carcinoma
Version: 4 Date: 27 Sep 2024
Reviewer's report:
This study indicated a considerable value of specific fatty acid metabolism-related genes in
the diagnostic and prognostic evaluation of hepatocellular carcinoma, which provide novel
insights into the disease's management, as well as has potential implications for personalized
treatment strategies. This study is methodologically sound and logically clear, with appropriate
modifications recommended.
1. Keywords should be further standardised and streamlined.
2. I recommend that the authors include more recent literature in their references. For example,
the authors cite ‘Global cancer statistics 2018/2020’. However, currently ‘Global cancer
statistics 2022: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in
185 countries’ has been published.
3. The authors state "The selection criteria for FAs-DEGs were log (fold-change) values # 0.5
and p-values < 0.05. " . However, p < 0.05 implies that the authors have used only nominal p-
values without multiple hypothesis correction. This is simply wrong. The authors should use
FDR or similar to control false-positive rate.
4. The authors only validated the genes in the model. The validity of the prognostic model should
be further validated in an independent HCC cohort.
5. Previous studies have used similar bioinformatics to develop potential biomarkers (doi:
10.7150/jca.91842; doi: 10.1016/j.tranon.2024.102001). I think it will benefit the reader if the
authors could include some references, which would provide readers with a more complete
understanding of the whole study.
assistant