Structured PREreview of A review of cancer treatment, including methods, drug combinations, availability, and ethical issues
- Published
- DOI
- 10.5281/zenodo.17754933
- License
- CC BY 4.0
- Does the introduction explain the objective of the research presented in the preprint?
- Yes
- The introduction vividly captured the objective of the research by highlighting the key therapeutic modalities.
- Are the methods well-suited for this research?
- Highly appropriate
- The paper is a well structured narrative review that is both informative and reproducible. Methodologies are also well structured and informative
- Are the conclusions supported by the data?
- Highly supported
- Are the data presentations, including visualizations, well-suited to represent the data?
- Highly appropriate and clear
- It is highly appropriate and clear because the information is well structured by therapy type with subheading for of all the modalities including the DDIs which enhanced comprehension.
- How clearly do the authors discuss, explain, and interpret their findings and potential next steps for the research?
- Very clearly
- Is the preprint likely to advance academic knowledge?
- Highly likely
- The manuscript is thoroughly written and highly comprehensive.
- Would it benefit from language editing?
- No
- There is no grammatical error and confusing phrases used. Abbreviations used were well explained and scientific.
- Would you recommend this preprint to others?
- Yes, it’s of high quality
- It is educational and encapsulates major therapeutic profile for tumors.
- Is it ready for attention from an editor, publisher or broader audience?
- Yes, as it is
- Scholarly, the manuscript is of high quality.
Competing interests
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI)
The authors declare that they did not use generative AI to come up with new ideas for their review.