In Vitro Investigation of Renal Cell Carcinoma Response to Combination Sorafenib and Cryoablation Treatment

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 the findings of this study may have important clinical implications for treating patients with kidney cancer. It highlights that this study shows the potential of employing a common pharmacologic agent used to treat renal cell cancer (RCC) when combined with the destructive effects of cryotherapy. The Discussion illustrates that the findings of the 3-dimensional tissue-engineered models (TEM) support the results of cell culture studies. Relevant literature has been cited to support the Discussion. The study concludes that the combination of sorafenib and cryoablation may provide a possible combinatorial treatment path for RCC.

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

Further comments on the paper

Comments: The in vitro study investigates the sensitivity of renal cell cancer (RCC) to freezing as well as evaluates the potential benefit of the combination of sorafenib (sub-clinical and clinical doses) and freezing. Cell culture and tissue-engineered tumor models were used in the study. The study highlights that the application of a repeat or double freeze to -20°C was found to yield complete cell destruction with no recovery. The findings of this study are consistent with published data on the lethal temperature in RCC. The 3-dimensional tissue-engineered tumor model confirmed the results of cell culture studies. This study shows the potential of employing a common pharmacologic agent used to treat RCC when combined with the destructive effects of cryotherapy. The limitations of the in vitro model are that it creates ideal conditions for cellular recovery and in vitro modeling cannot account for the effects of vascular stasis and host immune response during the recovery process following freezing. An additional variable that can affect an individual’s response to treatment is that cryoablation results in a large volume of necrotic tissue that must be cleared by the immune system. The study concludes that freezing alone and in combination with sorafenib pre-treatment may be beneficial for the treatment of renal cancer. Thereby, it has the potential to improve the outcome, reduce comorbidities associated with either treatment alone. Thus, providing for an effective minimally invasive treatment strategy. Further studies investigating the specific pathways activated in combination therapy are needed.

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