Insights into Treatment Patterns in the Routine Care of Patients Diagnosed with Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer in Germany After the Introduction of New Therapies

Review Data

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

researchers?

A: Excellent

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: Good

Tools and Methods

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

A: Very good

Discussion & Conclusion

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

A: Good

Comments:

The Results, clearly explained and aptly supported by data, indicate that the treatment pathways are individually optimized for the treatment of each patient and according to the physician’s choice. The Discussion and Conclusion section summarizes from the results that physicians treat patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) with life-prolonging systemic therapies, with the majority of patients receiving several lines of treatments. Furthermore, this study shows that real-world data are a valuable source to assess the actual treatment pathways in routine clinical practice.

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: Very 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: Very good

Writing style

Q: Is it clear and understandable?

A: Very good

Further comments on the paper

Comments: This retrospective analysis aims to describe treatment patterns including sequencing and treatment duration of patients diagnosed with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) between January 2013 and December 2015 in Germany, by characterizing the demographic and clinical characteristics of patients. A significant variability is observed in the treatment pathways pointing to a highly individualized treatment approach despite detailed treatment algorithms. The study has several limitations, most of which are a consequence of the use of claims data. The lack of information on important covariates, residual risk of misclassification of exposure and “metastatic status” in the patient’s data not being explicitly coded fall within those limitations.

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