Next Article in Journal
Precision Medicine and Triple-Negative Breast Cancer: Current Landscape and Future Directions
Next Article in Special Issue
Proliferative Potential, and Inflammatory Tumor Microenvironment in Meningioma Correlate with Neurological Function at Presentation and Anatomical Location—From Convexity to Skull Base and Spine
Previous Article in Journal
Gemcitabine Plus Nab-Paclitaxel Induces PD-L1 mRNA Expression in Plasma-Derived Microvesicles in Pancreatic Cancer
Previous Article in Special Issue
68Ga-DOTATOC-PET/MRI—A Secure One-Stop Shop Imaging Tool for Robotic Radiosurgery Treatment Planning in Patients with Optic Nerve Sheath Meningioma
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Cancers
Volume 13
Issue 15
10.3390/cancers13153712
Review Report
cancers-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
Systematic Review
Peer-Review Record

Mouse Models in Meningioma Research: A Systematic Review

Cancers 2021, 13(15), 3712; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/cancers13153712
by Julien Boetto 1,2, Matthieu Peyre 2,3,4 and Michel Kalamarides 2,3,4,*
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Cancers 2021, 13(15), 3712; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/cancers13153712
Submission received: 7 June 2021 / Revised: 10 July 2021 / Accepted: 21 July 2021 / Published: 26 July 2021
(This article belongs to the Special Issue State-of-the-Art Research in Meningioma)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The authors present a good overview and Review to mouse models for in vivo meningioma surgery. They should add following new publication also:

Fluorescence image-guided resection of intracranial meningioma: an experimental in vivo study on nude mice.

Linsler S, Müller SJ, Müller A, Senger S, Oertel JM.Linsler S, et al. Ann Anat. 2021 Sep;237:151752. doi: 10.1016/j.aanat.2021.151752. Epub 2021 Apr 30.   And discuss the fluorescence Imaging also.   Furthermore, the authors should present some translational informations (in vivo models and context to clinical work).     I suggest minor revivion before it mit be considered for publication.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

The introduction does not properly clarify what is the aim of this systematic review. If it is just a summary of the different preclinical mouse models of meningiomas and their uses, why the need for the review? In my opinion, the introduction should better expose what this review adds to the actual knowledge regarding mouse models of meningiomas. What is the objective? What is (are) the review question(s)?

The conclusion paragraph is also very short, is generic and lacks any relevant content. In my opinion, the conclusion section of a systematic review should provide some sort of interpretation of the findings in the review and also provide some discussion of issues arising from this findings. Potential limitations of the systematic review should also be listed here.

Author Response

please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Back to TopTop