Isolated Limb Perfusion in the Treatment of In-Transit Melanoma Metastases: Are There Predictive Factors for the Outcome?

Review Data

Purpose and Significance of Study: This study involved a retrospective analysis of 83 patients who underwent an isolated limb perfusion (ILP) at an institution before the era of efficient upfront systemic therapy in high-risk cases. ILP seemed like an effective treatment option in a selected group of patients with in-transit melanoma or satellite lesions on a limb. Also, some interesting preoperative prognostic factors that can help in this selection process were identified, although this requires further multicentre studies.

Fit with Scope of Journal: The manuscript is of very high interest for the Journal of Surgical Oncology.

o   The manuscript is well-written. There are only a few minor errors (already corrected in the galley proof), which are listed below –

 

The common ones are –

·       Omission of articles in many places, e.g., “the” before “outcome” in the title, “a” before “small” in the 2^nd sentence of the Materials and Methods, and so on.

·       Usage of wrong articles a few times, e.g., before “heat” in the 4^th sentence of the 2^nd paragraph under Procedural details in the Materials and Methods, before “LND” in the 1^st sentence off the 2^nd paragraph under Patients and procedure in the Results, and so on.

·       Omission of “,” in a few places, e.g., after “experience” in the 3^rd sentence of the 1^st paragraph of the Introduction, and so on.

·       “et al” must always be followed by “.”.

The other errors are –

In the Title –

·       “predicting” must be replaced with “predictive”.

In the Abstract –

  Under Introduction –

·       In the 2^nd sentence, “patient’s” must be replaced with “patient”.

In the Introduction –

  In the 1^st paragraph –

·       In the 3^rd sentence, “is” must be replaced with “are”.

In the Materials and Methods –

  In the 1^st paragraph –

·       In the 3^rd sentence, “outcome” must be replaced with “outcomes”.

  Under Outcome parameters –

  In the 3^rd paragraph –

·       In the 2^nd sentence, “;” after “group” must be replaced with “:”, and “;” before “patients” must be replaced with “, for”.

  Under Statistical evaluation –

  In the 1^st paragraph –

·       In the 2^nd sentence, “were” must be replaced with “was”.

·       In the 5^th sentence, “preoperative known” must be replaced with “known preoperative”, and “,” after “analysis” must be removed.

In the Discussion –

  In the 1^st paragraph –

·       In the 2^nd sentence, “outcome” must be replaced with “outcomes”.

·       In the 3^rd sentence, “,” after “results” must be removed.

  In the 2^nd paragraph –

·       In the 2^nd sentence, “widespread” must be replaced with “wide”.

  In the 6^th paragraph –

·       In the 2^nd and last sentences, “significant” must be replaced with “significantly”.

Author Info

Bechter Oliver Boecxstaens Veerle Garmyn Marjan Roel Bolckmans Stas Marguerite Van den Oord Joost Wolter Pascal

Corresponding Author

Stas Marguerite
Department of Surgical Oncology, University Hospital Gasthuisberg, Leuven, Belgium

Article Info

Article Type

Research Article

Publication history

Received: Sat 18, Apr 2020
Accepted: Thu 30, Apr 2020
Published: Mon 11, May 2020

Copyright

© 2023 Stas Marguerite. 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.JSO.2020.03.03