Vitamin D Deficiency and Tumor Response Failure in Breast Cancer Patients Receiving Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy at a Medical Center in Mexico

Review Data

Q: Is the topic relevant to the journal area of interest? Is it contemporary and interesting for

researchers?

A: Good

Abstract & Keywords

Q: Are all required components included in the abstract? Are the keywords appropriately chosen?

A: Very Good

Goal

Q: Is the goal explicitly stated in the Introduction? Is its formulation clear and unambiguous?

A: Very Good

Structure

Q: Is the paper's structure coherent? Is it in coherence with the goal of the paper?

A: Very Good

Tools and Methods

Q: Are methods the author uses adequate and well used?

A: Good

Discussion & Conclusion

Q: Is it related to the results presented before? Do you consider them as coherent?

A: Good

Comments: The Discussion establishes that no association between vitamin D deficiency and histological type, molecular profile and clinical stage was found. It states that an association between the vitamin D level and menopause was also not found. The Discussion illustrates that the blood sample was collected at the end of the neoadjuvant treatment to record the vitamin D level closer to surgery and to relate it to the tumor response. Relevant literature has been cited to support the Discussion. The study concludes that no association between vitamin D level and tumor response has been found.

Literature

Q: Does the author utilize relevant literature?

A: Good

Author's knowledge

Q: What is the level of the author’s knowledge? Does the author utilize all recent contributions relevant to the topic?

A: Good

Length

Q: Is the length of the paper adequate to the significance of the topic? Do you suggest shortening the paper without losing its value?

A: Good

Figures & Tables

Q: Does the author use them suitably? Are legend and notations clear?

A: Good

Writing style

Q: Is it clear and understandable?

A: Good

Comments: Except the following errors have been detected:

1.     The 5^th sentence in the 1^st paragraph under the subheading Study Design and Participants under Materials and Methods was not making sense and should be changed to “With prior authorization, blood sample was…. determine vitamin D level.”

2.     The 2^nd sentence in the 2^nd paragraph under Discussion was not framed properly and should be changed to “This strategy……. and to be able to relate it to the tumor response.”

Further comments on the paper

Comments: This prospective, cross-sectional, analytical and observational study aims at investigating the association between vitamin D deficiency and tumor response failure in patients with locally advanced breast cancer operated and those who have received neoadjuvant chemotherapy in a study population of thirty-six patients. The study highlights that the pathological complete response (pCR) achieved in this study was greater than that recorded worldwide. The study did not find any association between the vitamin D level and menopause. The limitations of the study include the small number of patients, heterogeneity in their clinical and pathological characteristics, and lack of other variables that might have affected the result. Factors like the climatic station at diagnosis and the total hours per day that the patients were exposed to sunlight, which were not recorded, might have affected the vitamin D level and the response to the cancer treatment. The study concluded that vitamin D deficiency is not associated with tumor response failure in breast cancer patients who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Future studies with a larger population and follow-up are needed, especially with a more specific group of patients. There is a need to find modifiable biomarkers that influence the tumor response in patients with breast cancer.

Q: Would you recommend this manuscript for further publication?

A: Yes - Suitable to be published

If you have any questions and clarifications you can write to the journal.

Thanks,
Science Repository Team