Title: Feasibility, Efficacy, and Safety of Ventral Caudal Artery Access for Transarterial
Chemoembolization in a Rat Hepatocellular Carcinoma Model
Version: 1 Date: 05 Mar 2025
Reviewer's report:
P5 L108
For reproducibility, I feel it is better to describe details of the MR parameters (model, Tesla
strength, sequence, etc). Was the MRI performed only once? If the tumor was smaller than 5
mm, was a re-scanning conducted?
P6 L113
Body weight at the procedure is important. I feel the body weight of the animals at the time of
angiography need to be described.
P10 L200
Did all animals show tumor enhancement which is consistent with MRI findings (without
spontaneous regression)?
P7 L143
It is reasonable that the DEB-TACE group received the procedure only one time. But, why did
the NS group undergo procedures two times? Just to assess repeatability? If there is reasonable
explanation about why authors chose the study design of 1 time DEB-TACE vs 2 times NS, it
would be better to describe it in more detail.
P8 L169 (and pathology Section)
Does this mean 12 specimens per tumor were evaluated? If there were any specific rules for
section preparation, such as using the largest cross-section, it would be better to describe.
Additionally, in the results section, creating a simple table might be helpful. If there is a
correlation between DOX distribution and necrosis rate, mentioning it could also be beneficial.
Title: Feasibility, Efficacy, and Safety of Ventral Caudal Artery Access for Transarterial
Chemoembolization in a Rat Hepatocellular Carcinoma Model
Version: 1 Date: 05 Mar 2025
Reviewer's report:
P5 L108
For reproducibility, I feel it is better to describe details of the MR parameters (model, Tesla
strength, sequence, etc). Was the MRI performed only once? If the tumor was smaller than 5
mm, was a re-scanning conducted?
P6 L113
Body weight at the procedure is important. I feel the body weight of the animals at the time of
angiography need to be described.
P10 L200
Did all animals show tumor enhancement which is consistent with MRI findings (without
spontaneous regression)?
P7 L143
It is reasonable that the DEB-TACE group received the procedure only one time. But, why did
the NS group undergo procedures two times? Just to assess repeatability? If there is reasonable
explanation about why authors chose the study design of 1 time DEB-TACE vs 2 times NS, it
would be better to describe it in more detail.
P8 L169 (and pathology Section)
Does this mean 12 specimens per tumor were evaluated? If there were any specific rules for
section preparation, such as using the largest cross-section, it would be better to describe.
Additionally, in the results section, creating a simple table might be helpful. If there is a
correlation between DOX distribution and necrosis rate, mentioning it could also be beneficial.
Please review this paper.
user
Title: Feasibility, Efficacy, and Safety of Ventral Caudal Artery Access for Transarterial
Chemoembolization in a Rat Hepatocellular Carcinoma Model
Version: 1 Date: 05 Mar 2025
Reviewer's report:
P5 L108
For reproducibility, I feel it is better to describe details of the MR parameters (model, Tesla
strength, sequence, etc). Was the MRI performed only once? If the tumor was smaller than 5
mm, was a re-scanning conducted?
P6 L113
Body weight at the procedure is important. I feel the body weight of the animals at the time of
angiography need to be described.
P10 L200
Did all animals show tumor enhancement which is consistent with MRI findings (without
spontaneous regression)?
P7 L143
It is reasonable that the DEB-TACE group received the procedure only one time. But, why did
the NS group undergo procedures two times? Just to assess repeatability? If there is reasonable
explanation about why authors chose the study design of 1 time DEB-TACE vs 2 times NS, it
would be better to describe it in more detail.
P8 L169 (and pathology Section)
Does this mean 12 specimens per tumor were evaluated? If there were any specific rules for
section preparation, such as using the largest cross-section, it would be better to describe.
Additionally, in the results section, creating a simple table might be helpful. If there is a
correlation between DOX distribution and necrosis rate, mentioning it could also be beneficial.
assistant