Title: Preoperative fibrinogen-to-albumin ratio predicts the prognosis of patients with
hepatocellular carcinoma subjected to hepatectomy
Version: 1 Date: 30 Mar 2022
Reviewer's report:
Except that Wu et al. reported prognostic value of FAR in predicting the prognosis of HCC
after hepatectomy, there's no other relevant studies concentrated on FRA and hepatectomy.
The authors compared the efficiency of FAR and other indicators of inflammatory factors and
AFP in predicting patients' outcomes after hepatectomy. This contributes to the accumulation
of evidence. However, limitations
major:
1.The authors mainly illustrated that FAR performed better than the other indexes by the
conclusions in Figure 1 and supplementary table 1, but in both tables, the t-roc was similar before
20 months/2 years, and the difference in FAR was obvious 20 months after hepatectomy, and
the t-roc of FAR was constantly increasing, especially in Figure 2b, where the t-roc curve of
FAR was almost constantly increasing, how can the authors explain this reason; Furthermore,
based on such results, is it possible to state that FAR outperforms other metrics?
2.Since four digit patients are included, why not design a training cohort and a validation cohort?
minor#
1.Ref 1 needs to be updated
2.Table 1 is missing a footnote; for eg: Age was presented as mean?/median? In the results
section, the authors stated a mean age of 50, and in the statistic analysis, the authors stated
Continuous variables are shown as medians
3.It is necessary to explain whether the operation is accomplished open or through laparoscopy
4.Subsequent treatment after progression included radiofrequency, chemotherapy, re-operation
or targeted therapy as appropriate. Does this have an impact on the OS of patients
5.Both fibrinogen and albumin are dynamically changing, can the authors present the time of
detection of this indicator?
6.table 1, Why not present the relevant content of Child-Pugh and AST
7.table 2 and 3, Categorical variables should be presented in a certain classification, like 'Child-
Puugh grade B' instead of 'Child-Pugh grade'; 'BCLC stage C?' instead of 'BCLC stage' only
Title: Preoperative fibrinogen-to-albumin ratio predicts the prognosis of patients with
hepatocellular carcinoma subjected to hepatectomy
Version: 1 Date: 30 Mar 2022
Reviewer's report:
Except that Wu et al. reported prognostic value of FAR in predicting the prognosis of HCC
after hepatectomy, there's no other relevant studies concentrated on FRA and hepatectomy.
The authors compared the efficiency of FAR and other indicators of inflammatory factors and
AFP in predicting patients' outcomes after hepatectomy. This contributes to the accumulation
of evidence. However, limitations
major:
1.The authors mainly illustrated that FAR performed better than the other indexes by the
conclusions in Figure 1 and supplementary table 1, but in both tables, the t-roc was similar before
20 months/2 years, and the difference in FAR was obvious 20 months after hepatectomy, and
the t-roc of FAR was constantly increasing, especially in Figure 2b, where the t-roc curve of
FAR was almost constantly increasing, how can the authors explain this reason; Furthermore,
based on such results, is it possible to state that FAR outperforms other metrics?
2.Since four digit patients are included, why not design a training cohort and a validation cohort?
minor#
1.Ref 1 needs to be updated
2.Table 1 is missing a footnote; for eg: Age was presented as mean?/median? In the results
section, the authors stated a mean age of 50, and in the statistic analysis, the authors stated
Continuous variables are shown as medians
3.It is necessary to explain whether the operation is accomplished open or through laparoscopy
4.Subsequent treatment after progression included radiofrequency, chemotherapy, re-operation
or targeted therapy as appropriate. Does this have an impact on the OS of patients
5.Both fibrinogen and albumin are dynamically changing, can the authors present the time of
detection of this indicator?
6.table 1, Why not present the relevant content of Child-Pugh and AST
7.table 2 and 3, Categorical variables should be presented in a certain classification, like 'Child-
Puugh grade B' instead of 'Child-Pugh grade'; 'BCLC stage C?' instead of 'BCLC stage' only
Please review this paper.
user
Title: Preoperative fibrinogen-to-albumin ratio predicts the prognosis of patients with
hepatocellular carcinoma subjected to hepatectomy
Version: 1 Date: 30 Mar 2022
Reviewer's report:
Except that Wu et al. reported prognostic value of FAR in predicting the prognosis of HCC
after hepatectomy, there's no other relevant studies concentrated on FRA and hepatectomy.
The authors compared the efficiency of FAR and other indicators of inflammatory factors and
AFP in predicting patients' outcomes after hepatectomy. This contributes to the accumulation
of evidence. However, limitations
major:
1.The authors mainly illustrated that FAR performed better than the other indexes by the
conclusions in Figure 1 and supplementary table 1, but in both tables, the t-roc was similar before
20 months/2 years, and the difference in FAR was obvious 20 months after hepatectomy, and
the t-roc of FAR was constantly increasing, especially in Figure 2b, where the t-roc curve of
FAR was almost constantly increasing, how can the authors explain this reason; Furthermore,
based on such results, is it possible to state that FAR outperforms other metrics?
2.Since four digit patients are included, why not design a training cohort and a validation cohort?
minor#
1.Ref 1 needs to be updated
2.Table 1 is missing a footnote; for eg: Age was presented as mean?/median? In the results
section, the authors stated a mean age of 50, and in the statistic analysis, the authors stated
Continuous variables are shown as medians
3.It is necessary to explain whether the operation is accomplished open or through laparoscopy
4.Subsequent treatment after progression included radiofrequency, chemotherapy, re-operation
or targeted therapy as appropriate. Does this have an impact on the OS of patients
5.Both fibrinogen and albumin are dynamically changing, can the authors present the time of
detection of this indicator?
6.table 1, Why not present the relevant content of Child-Pugh and AST
7.table 2 and 3, Categorical variables should be presented in a certain classification, like 'Child-
Puugh grade B' instead of 'Child-Pugh grade'; 'BCLC stage C?' instead of 'BCLC stage' only
assistant