Next Article in Journal
Acute Effects of Running on Shear Wave Elastography Measures of the Achilles Tendon and Calf Muscles in Professional Female Handball and Volleyball Players
Previous Article in Journal
Predicting Peri-Operative Outcomes in Patients Treated with Percutaneous Thermal Ablation for Small Renal Masses: The SuNS Nephrometry Score
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Evaluating the Necessity of Adaptive RT and the Role of Deformable Image Registration in Lung Cancer with Different Pathologic Classifications

Diagnostics 2023, 13(18), 2956; https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics13182956
by Woo Chul Kim 1,2, Yong Kyun Won 2, Sang Mi Lee 3, Nam Hun Heo 4, Seung-Gu Yeo 5, Ah Ram Chang 6, Sun Hyun Bae 5, Jae Sik Kim 6, Ik Dong Yoo 3, Sun-pyo Hong 3, Chul Kee Min 1,2, In Young Jo 2,* and Eun Seog Kim 2,*
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Diagnostics 2023, 13(18), 2956; https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics13182956
Submission received: 31 July 2023 / Revised: 7 September 2023 / Accepted: 9 September 2023 / Published: 15 September 2023

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

I would like to thank the Authors for the submitted manuscript.

On average, I appreciate the topic: different timing for ART based on histology in lung cancer.

The results are based on 30 patients, which is a small sample to drive firm conclusions.

The manuscript in results section is verbose, I would suggest making it easier for readers to summarize in a table.

Minor typos:

Abstract: … in radiation dose irradiated to normal tissues… please revise

The study was and approved: typos, delete “and”

 

Conclusion: underscore, I would suggest “highlight “

no further comments

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

I have read with great interest the manuscript "Evaluating the necessity of adaptive RT and the role of deform-able image registration in lung cancer with different pathologic classification" which concerns an interesting subject. 

I have no major objections, apart from I believe the MS would approve of being shortened for reading purposes. Some of the information in the text could also be presented in tables instead. The limitations are clearly presented. 

Please clarify the nodal status of the patients and if chemotherapy was given or not. 

Tables are missing in the submission. 

It would be interesting to couple the findings to clinical outcome data. 

Good

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Back to TopTop