Wang YC, Zhang CG, Wang YW, Guo C, Pan T, Yu PJ, Cai BJ, Ding RH, Qiang JL, Deng CQ, Hu CH, Xu YH. SOX plus sintilimab vs P-SOX vs SOX as neoadjuvant therapy in advanced gastric cancer: Efficacy and safety. World J Gastrointest Oncol 2025; 17(8): 109646 [PMID: 40837776 DOI: 10.4251/wjgo.v17.i8.109646]
Reader's ID:
00735730
Submitted on:
August 15, 2025, 15:49
Reader Expertise:
Reader’s expertise on the topic of the manuscript
Conflicts-of-Interest Statement:
Does the reader have a conflict of interest?
Reader Comment Standards for Published Articles:
1 Title
Does the title reflect the main subject/hypothesis of the manuscript?
2 Abstract
Does the abstract summarize and reflect the work described in the manuscript?
3 Key Words
Do the key words reflect the focus of the manuscript?
4 Background
Does the manuscript adequately describe the background, present status and significance of the study?
5 Methods
Does the manuscript describe methods (e.g., experiments, data analysis, surveys, and clinical trials, etc.) in adequate detail?
6 Results
Are the research objectives achieved by the experiments used in this study?
Has the study made meaningful contributions towards research progress in this field?
7 Discussion
Does the manuscript interpret the findings adequately and appropriately, highlighting the key points concisely, clearly and logically?
Are the findings and their applicability/relevance to the literature stated in a clear and definite manner?
Is the Discussion accurate and does it discuss the paper’s scientific significance and/or relevance to clinical practice sufficiently?
8 Illustrations and Tables
Are the figures, diagrams and tables sufficient, good quality and appropriately illustrative of the paper contents?
Do figures require labeling with arrows, asterisks, etc., or better legends?
9 Biostatistics
Does the manuscript meet the requirements of biostatistics?
10 Units
Does the manuscript meet the requirements of use of SI units?
11 References
Does the manuscript appropriately cite the latest, important and authoritative references in the Introduction and Discussion sections?
Does the author self-cite, omit, incorrectly cite and/or over-cite references?
12 Quality of manuscript organization and presentation
Is the manuscript concisely and coherently organized and presented?
Are the style, language and grammar accurate and appropriate?
13 Ethics statements
For all manuscripts involving human studies and/or animal experiments, author(s) must submit the related formal ethics documents that were reviewed and approved by their local ethical review committee. Did the manuscript meet the requirements of ethics?
Scientific Quality:
The overall quality of the manuscript, based on the above-listed criteria, should be evaluated and classified according to the following five categories
Language Quality:
Language quality (style, grammar, and spelling) should be evaluated and classified according to the following five categories.
Reader Comments:
Wang et al should be acknowledged for their real-world study, assessing the efficacy and safety of perioperative immunotherapy (sintilimab) plus chemotherapy (SOX) for patients with non-metastatic gastric cancer (GC). They suggested that pathological response rate and overall survival were significantly improved with perioperative sintilimab plus SOX chemotherapy compared to perioperative chemotherapy alone. In addition, safety data showed lower frequency of high-grade adverse events in immuno-chemotherapy combination. However, the study presents several limitations, such as:
- the retrospective nature, leading to selection bias;
- the limited power of the study, in fact, a larger phase-III trials, assessing perioperative immunotherapy plus chemotherapy (Keynote-585 and MATTERHON) were recently published;
- the sub-optimal chemotherapy regimen (SOX) used in combination with immunotherapy.
Finally, according to Wang and MATTERHON data, we can conclude, that immunotherapy added to chemotherapy cures more patients with stage-II/III gastric cancer compared to chemotherapy, constituting a possible new standard of care.
Reply from the Editorial Office:
First, thank you very much for your professional comments on the article published in World Journal of Gastrointestinal Oncology.
Second, we read your comments with great interest. You are welcome to format your valuable comments into a Letter to the Editor and submit it online to World Journal of Gastrointestinal Oncology at https://www.f6publishing.com. There are no restrictions on the number of words, figures (color, B/W) or authors for a Letter to the Editor. In addition, the article processing charge will be exempted for this Letter to the Editor. As with all articles published by the Baishideng Publishing Group, the Letter to the Editor will be published online after completing peer review. The guidelines for a Letter to the Editor can be found at: https://www.wjgnet.com/bpg/GerInfo/219.
Finally, we look forward to receiving your high-quality Letter to the Editor, which will promote academic communication and lead the development of this discipline.