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
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
Science Repository This email is restricted to the intended user. |
Science Repository - Support |
Author Info
Nahila Justo Bernd Schweikert Andreas Simon A. Reginald Waldeck Michael Meinhardt Yves-René Samel Peter J. Goebell
Corresponding Author
Nahila JustoDepartment of Neurobiology, Care Sciences and Society at Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden
Article Info
Article Type
Research ArticlePublication history
Received: Sat 22, Aug 2020Accepted: Mon 07, Sep 2020
Published: Mon 28, Sep 2020
Copyright
© 2023 Nahila Justo. 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.2020.09.04