Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention
CERTIFICATE OF REVIEWING
This certification is awarded to Dr. Kamal Basri Siregar for participating as the reviewer of the manuscript titled "EVALUATION OF HEALTH-RELATED QUALITY OF LIFE IN PATIENTS RECEIVING TREATMENT FOR PENILE CANCER: A SINGLE-CENTER CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY" in the peer review process for Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention.
Review Date: 2023-01-30
# Manuscript ID Manuscript Title Current Status
Assign Date
Agree/Decline Date
Review Date
Review Recom 1 APJCP-2212-8696 EVALUATION
OF HEALTH- RELATED QUALITY OF LIFE IN PATIENTS RECEIVING TREATMENT FOR PENILE CANCER: A SINGLE- CENTER CROSS- SECTIONAL STUDY
Under Review
2023-01-26 2023-01-28 2023-01-30 Major Manuscript Title EVALUATION OF HEALTH-RELATED QUALITY OF LIFE IN PATIENTS RECEIVING
TREATMENT FOR PENILE CANCER: A SINGLE-CENTER CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY
Manuscript ID APJCP-2212-8696
Reviewer Name Siregar, Kamal Basri Email Address kamal@usu.ac.id
Position Instructor , Degree: Ph.D. Phone: Mobile: +6281338513761
Specialty Oncology Speci c Field of
Study
Surgical Oncology
A liation Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Universitas Sumatera Utara-RSUP H. Adam Malik Medan
Assign Date 2023-01-26 10:11:03 Review Due Date 2023-02-12
Agree/Decline Agree Agree/Decline Date 2023-01-28 01:08:53
Reviewer
Recommendation
Major Revision Review Date 2023-01-30 07:43:14
Editor Comment for Reviewer
Reviewer Comment For Editor/Editor-in-Chief Greetings to the Editor in Chief,
Greetings to the author
On behalf of the reviewer, I am impressed by the paper because it is well written and yet raises essential issues regarding penile cancer patients' quality of life.
Several comments that I would like to address are:
Introduction:
1. The author mentioned the data on penile cancer patients in Indonesia from data that was from 2006-2013. Is there any recent data regarding this subject? Moreover, is there any data published about penile cancer incidence in the author regions, for instance: Medan, North Sumatra, Indonesia?
This is quite vital for explaining the sense of urgency in this paper.
2. Line 63 seems like a missing paragraph and needs several additional sentences to ful ll the arguments. The author talked about the pathway in chronic in ammation that leads to carcinogenesis. Please explain it more.
3. In line 82, there is a missing sentence to complete the whole paragraph. Please make sure the
author put the explanation clearer.
Methods
1. Please mention the number of approved ethics committee letters as the author said about the ethical considerations in this paper.
2. Several missed abbreviations are not consistent throughout the paper. Please x this, especially in lines 102 and 103.
3. Did the author conduct the reliability test for the questionnaire? Because it seems like in the introduction, the author mentioned that the EORTC-QLQ C-30 questionnaire has also been validated and translated into Indonesian by Perwitasari et al. (2011) so that it can be used to help assess the quality of life of cancer patients in this case, especially penile cancer patients. Did the author rerun the reliability test?
Research result
1. The header for research results should be only "Results."
2. In line 148, the author wrote, "SMP education." Is this a proper wording for this or Junior High School? Please use the correct and consistent abbreviations.
3. It is suggested that the author add some gures to show the contrasted demographic between variables.
Discussions
1. In line 199, the author mentioned age characteristics. Then what is the analysis regarding this age data? If these research results align with previous studies, what is the further analysis regarding this?
2. The author mentioned, "Although valuable evaluation tools, other instruments may be used for various cancers or other pathologies but have not been developed speci cally for patients with penile cancer." Is any speci city/sensitivity/reliability test mentioned in previous studies regarding this instrument?
Reviewer Comment For Author Greetings to the author
On behalf of the reviewer, I am impressed by the paper because it is well written and yet raises essential issues regarding penile cancer patients' quality of life.
Several comments that I would like to address are:
Introduction:
1. The author mentioned the data on penile cancer patients in Indonesia from data that was from 2006-2013. Is there any recent data regarding this subject? Moreover, is there any data published about penile cancer incidence in the author regions, for instance: Medan, North Sumatra, Indonesia?
This is quite vital for explaining the sense of urgency in this paper.
2. Line 63 seems like a missing paragraph and needs several additional sentences to ful ll the arguments. The author talked about the pathway in chronic in ammation that leads to carcinogenesis. Please explain it more.
3. In line 82, there is a missing sentence to complete the whole paragraph. Please make sure the
Manuscript Evaluation Form author put the explanation clearer.
Methods
1. Please mention the number of approved ethics committee letters as the author said about the ethical considerations in this paper.
2. Several missed abbreviations are not consistent throughout the paper. Please x this, especially in lines 102 and 103.
3. Did the author conduct the reliability test for the questionnaire? Because it seems like in the introduction, the author mentioned that the EORTC-QLQ C-30 questionnaire has also been validated and translated into Indonesian by Perwitasari et al. (2011) so that it can be used to help assess the quality of life of cancer patients in this case, especially penile cancer patients. Did the author rerun the reliability test?
Research result
1. The header for research results should be only "Results."
2. In line 148, the author wrote, "SMP education." Is this a proper wording for this or Junior High School? Please use the correct and consistent abbreviations.
3. It is suggested that the author add some gures to show the contrasted demographic between variables.
Discussions
1. In line 199, the author mentioned age characteristics. Then what is the analysis regarding this age data? If these research results align with previous studies, what is the further analysis regarding this?
2. The author mentioned, "Although valuable evaluation tools, other instruments may be used for various cancers or other pathologies but have not been developed speci cally for patients with penile cancer." Is any speci city/sensitivity/reliability test mentioned in previous studies regarding this instrument?
Related Files
APJCP-2212-8696-1-38-rev.docx
1. Will the manuscript, if published, be cited by others?
No, there will be no citation Yes but very limited citation Yes, moderate ctitation Yes high citation
2. Score novelty of the manuscript.
7
3. Does the manuscript has any degree of usefulness?
8
4. Does the manuscript show adequate degree of literature review by author? Score it.
Total Score: 52
6
5. Score how statistical procedure is handled in methods and results. If it is not in your domain of expertise, please leave it blank.
6
6. Clarity of presentation of research ndings. How organized is the result section? Score it.
6
7. Score how the tables are design and presented? If no table please leave it blank.
7
8. Score the quality of gures. If no gure please leave it blank.
9. Score the readability and English writing quality of manuscript.
6
10. Score your over all assessment of the manuscript (1 being the lowest and 10 the highest, 5 is a passing score)
6
11. Do you give consent to publish your name as the reviewer of this manuscript? read the comments
Yes, I give consent No, I do not give consent
12. To shorten the peer review process, a subject editor in your behalf checks a revised manuscript to validate if the author has addressed your concerns (comments for authors). If You prefer to validate yourself, please choose the right option:
Subject Editor evaluate I will evaluate
