Prognostic and Predictive Value of the Tumor-Stroma Ratio in STAGE II Colon Cancer

Prognostic and Predictive Value of the Tumor-Stroma Ratio in STAGE II Colon Cancer

Review Data

Purpose and Significance of Study: This study validated in a cohort of stage II colon cancer patients that patients carrying colon tumors with high amounts of stroma have a significantly shorter distant recurrence-free survival and more cancer related death. Although no predictive value could be inferred for the TSR with respect to adjuvant chemotherapy in stage II colon cancer, there is still a predictive potential in this observer-based parameter, since these methods are more cost-effective and easier to integrate in current clinical workflows. 

 

Fit with Scope of Journal: The manuscript is of very high interest for the journal Clinical Oncology and Research.

o   The manuscript has a few minor errors (already corrected in the galley proof), which are listed below –

 

The common errors are –

·       Omission of “,”, e.g., after “however” in the 7th sentence of the Introduction, after “years” in the 12th sentence of the Introduction, and so on.

·       Overuse of “,”, e.g., before “since” in the 8th sentence of the Introduction, after “groups” in the 5th sentence of Baseline characteristics in the Results, and so on.

·       Not ending sentences at the appropriate places, e.g., in the 11th sentence of the Introduction, the sentence must end before “however”; in the 4th sentence of Histopathological scoring of tumour-stroma ratio in the Materials and Methods, the sentence must end before “subsequently”, and so on.

The other errors are –

 

In the Introduction –

·       In the 4th sentence, “early stage” must be hyphenated, and “a” before “favorable” must be removed.

·       In the 6th sentence, all “;” must be replaced with “,”.

In the Materials and Methods –

  Under Histopathological scoring of tumour-stroma ratio –

·       In the 2nd sentence, “is” after “stroma” must be replaced with “was”.

·       In the 3rd sentence, “are” must be replaced with “were” both times.

·       In the 4th sentence, “are” must be replaced with “were” both times, and “etcetera” must be replaced with “etc.”.

  Under Statistical analysis –

·       In the 4th sentence, “were” must be replaced with “was”.

In the Results –

  Under Baseline characteristics –

·       In the 4th sentence, “was” after “data” must be replaced with “were”.

  Under Tumor-stroma ratio –

·       In the last sentence, “from 34 patients clinical data was not available” must be replaced with “clinical data was not available from 34 patients”, and “of” after “comprised” must be removed.

  Under Predictive value of TSR –

·       In the last sentence, “amount” must be replaced with “number”, and “which” must be replaced with “who”.

In the Discussion –

  In the 1st paragraph –

·       In the 2nd sentence, “has lead” must be replaced with “led”.

  In the 4th paragraph –

·       In the 3rd sentence, “.” must be removed.

·       In the 7th sentence, “likewise to” must be replaced with “like”, and “also” must be removed.

·       In the 8th sentence, “which” must be replaced with “who”.

  In the 5th paragraph –

·       In the 1st sentence, “administrated” must be replaced with “administered”.

·       In the 2nd sentence, “as” before “outdated” must be removed.

Author Info

Corresponding Author
Wilma E. Mesker
Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, The Netherlands

Article Info

Article Type
Research Article
Publication history
Received: Mon 13, Apr 2020
Accepted: Tue 28, Apr 2020
Published: Thu 30, Apr 2020
Copyright
© 2023 Wilma E. Mesker. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. Hosting by Science Repository.
DOI: 10.31487/j.COR.2020.04.12