-
Reviews
Back to Reviews
Submited on: 31 Dec 2012 12:49:31 PM GMT
Published on: 31 Dec 2012 06:27:59 PM GMT
-
What are the main claims of the paper and how important are they?
No claims, this is single case presentation.
-
Are these claims novel? If not, please specify papers that weaken the claims to the originality of this one.
No claims, this is case presentation.
-
Are the claims properly placed in the context of the previous literature?
No claims, this is case presentation.
-
Do the results support the claims? If not, what other evidence is required?
No claims, this is case presentation.
-
If a protocol is provided, for example for a randomized controlled trial, are there any important deviations from it? If so, have the authors explained adequately why the deviations occurred?
No protocol, this is case presentation.
-
Is the methodology valid? Does the paper offer enough details of its methodology that its experiments or its analyses could be reproduced?
No methodology, this is case presentation.
-
Would any other experiments or additional information improve the paper? How much better would the paper be if this extra work was done, and how difficult would such work be to do, or to provide?
presenting laboratory investigations in schedule would make it easier to read.
-
Is this paper outstanding in its discipline? (For example, would you like to see this work presented in a seminar at your hospital or university? Do you feel these results need to be incorporated in your next general lecture on the subject?) If yes, what makes it outstanding? If not, why not?
Good presentation but not outstanding
-
Other Comments:
Good presentation results of investigations preferably to be presented in a figure to be easier to understand.
-
Competing interests:
None
-
Invited by the author to review this article? :
No -
Have you previously published on this or a similar topic?:
No
-
References:
No
-
Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:
Consultant, Author and Refree of Obstetrics and Gynaecology
- How to cite: Othman M .First Case Report[Review of the article 'Succesful Treatment of Nongestational Chorioc Arcinoma of Uterine Body in a Young Girl With Modified EMA-Cotherapy and thus Preserving Fertility - The First case in World Literature ' by Kaur K].WebmedCentral 2013;3(12):WMCRW002426
All site content, except where otherwise noted, is licensed under a
Claim: First case in world literature
It is not clear with regards the claim of uniqueness made - is it for finding nongestational trophoblastic tumor in the uterus, occurence in alleged virin, in the young woman/ girl, for opting conservative management, or for 'spontaneous' tumor expulsion? As combination of these factors in an individual, may be yes. But:
1. Nongestational trophoblastic tumors from uterus - there are individual case reports; a review of more then 100 cases by one of the authors;
2. Occurence in the young - seen in young girl of 13;
3. Disease in a 'virgin' - if in relation to antecedent pregnancy, the literature is replete with uterine choriocarcinoma in postmenopausal women, very much remote from reproductive age;
4. Success with EMACO - is reported and practiced;
5. Spontaneous expulsion of tumor - is more often seen in cases with malignant mixed mesodermal tumors; in this case the claim is not clear as whether it was expression of disease or the indicator of cure.
As above
It is admitted that the attempt was made to get the analysis of DNA polymorphism using PCR from the tissue biopsy, since it was necrotic tissue could not get the report. It could have been tried from the blood sample and repeat biopsy was not necessary.
It is only a case report.
It is only a case report.
PCR analysis for DNA polymorphism from blood could have been tried to substatiate the diagnosis when tissue biopsy failed to provide result due to necrosis.
No
Author should have acknowledged or declared about the presentation of the data, if it was made earlier. Please vide Kulvinder Kaur, Jalandhar. Nongestational choriocarcinoma-a succesfully treated 1st case in world literature
No
No
No
None
I am a gynecologist interested in oncology.