AUCTORES
Globalize your Research
Research Article
*Corresponding Author: Husain Taha Radhi, Department of Endocrinology, Salmanyia Medical Complex, Ministry of Health, Bahrain. Dr Hasan Farookh Jamal. Department of Internal Medicine, Salmaniya Medical Complex, Manama, Bahrain. Dr Aysha Asif Sarwani. Department of Internal
Citation: Husain TR, Hasan FJ, Aysha AS, Abdullah JJ, Marwa FA, Abdullah SA, Buthainah AA, Zeenab JA. Efficacy of a single fixed 131I dose of radioactive iodine for the treatment of hyperthyroidism. J Endocrinology and Disorders. 3(1): Doi: 10.31579/2640-1045/045
Copyright: © 2019 Husain TR, Hasan FJ, Aysha AS, Abdullah JJ, Marwa FA, Abdullah SA, Buthainah AA, Zeenab JA. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Received: 15 October 2019 | Accepted: 23 October 2019 | Published: 30 October 2019
Keywords: Radioactive iodine treatment; Hyperthyroidism; 131I; Fixed dose
A total of 135 patients were treated for hyperthyroidism with 131I 15 mCi radioiodine ablation. The therapeutic target was achieving hypothyroidism.
Between January 2014 and December 2018, clinical records were reviewed and date was collected and reviewed for 135 patients with hyperthyroidism that were referred to the Nuclear Medicine Department at Salmaniya Medical Center, for radioactive iodine (RAI) thyroid gland ablation procedure for definitive treatment of hyperthyroidism.
About 39.7% of our patients achieved response between 4-6 months out of which 35.7% of the patients showed response in the first 3 months. 21.4% of the patients took between 7-12 months to show response and only 3.2% responded after 12 months. The most significant response was hypothyroidism comprising of 94.4%. It is also worth mentioning that 4.0% of patients achieved euthyroidism and did not require any follow-up medication.
Using fixed dose of RAI of 15mCi for treating various type of Hyperthyroidism, successful treatment with a single dose of RAI can be achieved in 92.7% of the patients, with first therapy failure rate in 7.3%, with few patients requiring additional doses of RAI.
Overt Hyperthyroidism affects 0.1- 0.5% of the population worldwide, with female preponderance (F5–10:M1) peaking between 40 and 60 years (1). Radioactive iodine 131I (RAI) has been used as a treatment of hyperthyroidism, used as a first line or second line treatment for the past six decades, 131I being selectively concentrated by functioning thyroid tissue and subsequently destroyed by beta-radiation (1-3). 131I as a treatment is safe and well-tolerated for hyperthyroidism, which is caused by Graves’ disease, multinodular goiter and autonomously hyper functioning nodule. (4)
There is a lot of publication on various treatment protocols for using the RAI therapy which are used by different institutions to achieve the goal of treatment.
It remains a matter of debate when opting for the treatment protocol, whether to opt for a calculated dose versus a fixed dose, or a high dose versus a low dose of 131I (2).Also, whether the target should be immediate hypothyroidism versus long term medical management of hyperthyroidism continues to be a subject of interest (5).
Furthermore, another debate is the treatment methodology, some use proposed fixed doses of administered 131I, usually between (5–15 mCi), whilst others have adopted dose metric approaches, based on calculations that take into account RAIU measurements and thyroid volume (1).
In our institute the fixed dose protocol administration been used over the last 6 years. The Objective of this study is to evaluate the success rate of therapeutic administration of a single fixed 131I (15mCi) activity for eliminating different causes of hyperthyroidism.
Patients
This was a retrospective cross-sectional study. We reviewed clinical records and collected data of 135 hyperthyroid patients for radioactive ablation therapy in our center, Salmaniya Medical Complex, between January 2014 and December 2018.
Thyrotoxicosis is a condition that occurs due to excessive thyroid hormone in the body. Thyrotoxicosis was diagnosed on the basis of elevated free T4 (FT4) and/or total T3 (TT3) values and suppressed TSH to < 0.25 mIU/L. Subclinical hyperthyroidism was diagnosed as normal FT4 and TT3 values with TSH suppressed < 0.25 mIU/L on more than one occasion over several months of observation. The etiology of hyperthyroidism in all patients was based on their biochemical profile (TSH, T4, T3 and TSH receptor antibody), thyroid sonography or imaging of the thyroid with Radioiodine uptake scan.
Patients on antithyroid medication were asked to withhold it for at least 5-7 days prior to thyroid imaging and also to avoid food containing iodized salts and to avoid eating or drinking eight hours prior to the procedure.
The Radioactive iodine (I-131) is swallowed in capsule form; once it is ingested it is quickly absorbed into the bloodstream in the gastrointestinal (GI) tract and concentrated from the blood by the thyroid gland, where it begins destroying the gland's cells. Although the radioactivity from this treatment remains in the thyroid for some time, it is greatly reduced within a few days. We used a fixed dose of 15 mCi 131I in all the patients.
The outcome of this treatment on the thyroid gland usually takes about one to three months to develop, with maximum benefit occurring three to six months after treatment. Generally, a solitary dose is required in successfully treating hyperthyroidism. However, less commonly, a second or third treatment may be needed to achieve the wanted result.
Patients were followed up at 6 -12 weeks post ablation, and advised about the symptoms of hypothyroidism and to test for TSH and T4 earlier if any symptoms developed. After 3 months the patients were again followed up at 6 months and at 12 months. Once hypothyroidism was established based on symptoms and laboratory data of a low T3 and T4 and prior to the development of high TSH, thyroxine hormone replacement therapy was initiated. Persistent evidence of hyperthyroidism was defined as treatment failure.
Statistical analysis
SPSS 23 was used for data entry and analysis. Frequencies and percentages were computed for the categorical variables. Mean and standard deviation were computed for the quantitative variables. Simple bar charts and pie charts were used to represent the categorical variables. Clustered bar charts were used to represent the relationship between two categorical variables. Line charts were used to represent the relationship between the response to RAI and each of TSH level and T4 level. Cross-tabulation was done between the demographical variables and Type of Hyperthyroidism. Fisher's exact test was used to test whether there is a significant relationship between the response to RAI and each of number of times of RAI and Medication. P-value less than 0.05 was statistically considered significant.
Over a four year interval, 135 patients with hyperthyroidism were treated with RAI.
92.7% of the patients received RAI therapy once only and 7.3% of the patients required it more than once (Table 1, Figure 1).
This response is very significant because it also represents our criteria – getting RAI only for one time- to signify a patient as a successful responding patient to RAI therapy. Fortunately, more than 90% who received RAI therapy for the first time has shown a response to RAI (Table 1, Figure 2) which was measured by a rise in the levels of TSH and a fall in the level of T4.
Among all causes of hyperthyroidism among our patients, toxic diffuse goiter was the most common type of hyperthyroidism with a percentage of 86.7%. Toxic multinodular goiter and toxic single nodule comprised a percentage of 8.1% and 5.2% respectively (Table 1, Figure 3).
It is worth noting that other clinical diagnosis such a thyroiditis and thyroid cancer were excluded.
Hypothyroidism was the most dominant response comprising a percentage of 94.4% (Table 1, Figure 4).
It is also worth mentioning that 4.0% of patients became euthyroid and require no follow-up medication.
79.4% % of patients had a thyroid scan only once while 20.6% required it again (Table 1, Figure 5).
About 39.7% of our patients responded between 4-6 months. 35.7% of the patients responded between 1-3 months. 21.4%patients took between 7-12 months to show a response and only 3.2% showed a response after 12 months (Table 1, Figure 6).
From our study we can roughly conclude that a trend is generated, starting with toxic diffuse goiter to be the most common type in all ages. However, there is a gradual decrease in its prevalence from younger ages reaching older ages (exclusively 100% in <20 years and 77.8% in >60 years) (Table 2, Figure 7).
The prevalence of other types of hyperthyroidism such as toxic multinodular goiter and toxic single nodule showed a gradual increase from younger ages till older ages. Toxic multinodular goiter was 0% prevalent in <20 years but reached to be 11.1% in >60 years. Exactly the same trend and percentages is applied to toxic single nodule (Table 2, Figure 7).
Figure 8: A bar graph illustrating the type of hyperthyroidism in relation to gender.
Toxic diffuse goiter is the most common type among both genders comprising a percentage of 90% among males and 5% less among females (Table 2, Figure 8).
However, they differ in other types in that toxic single nodule was the 2nd most common type among males (7.5%) while toxic multinodular goiter was the 2nd most common type among females (10.5%) (Table 2, Figure 8).
We also studied if there was any difference on the different causes of hyperthyroidism in relation to the nationality of the patients. Toxic diffuse goiter was the commonest type among both Bahraini and non-Bahraini. However, toxic multinodular goiter was more among non-Bahrainis than Bahraini’s (11.5% and 7.3% respectively). In addition, toxic single nodule was slightly more in Bahraini’s than non-Bahraini’s (5.5% and 3.8% respectively) (Table 2, Figure 9).
The percentage of response and failure of patients after receiving RAI therapy once in comparison to response and failure of patients receiving RAI more than once was approximately the same (Table 3, Figure 10).
However, patients who received RAI more than once showed a slight higher response (80% response for more than once and 78% for a single RAI therapy). These results were mirrored on failure rates as patients who received only a single RAI therapy were slightly higher than who received more than once RAI (21.7% and 20.0% respectively) (Table 3, Figure 10).
The study also looked at the response of patients to single RAI therapy and failure of patients to show response if they received more than once RAI therapy- in relation to either pre or post RAI therapy medication (Table 3).
Apparently the patients who took medications showed a higher rate of response than the patients who did not (81.8% and 74.1% respectively). These results were also reflected on failing to respond patients as those who did not receive medications had a higher failure rate than those who received it (25.9% and 18.2% respectively) (Table 3, Figure 11).
For assessing the response of RAI therapy, an average of 2 TSH readings was taken before RAI and 3 readings after RAI therapy (Table 4).
After RAI was given, a gradual increase in TSH is observed, reaching from 0 to until a maximum of 30mU/L until it returns to decline at the 3rd reading (Table 4, Figure 12).
There was a dramatic decline in the levels of t4 by about three quarters falling from a maximum of 45 ug/dl to about 10 ug/dl after the 3rd reading after RAI therapy (Table 4, Figure 13).
American Thyroid Association (ATA) guidelines advocate the target of achieving a state of hypothyroidism as a treatment for hyperthyroidism, which can be accomplished with basic fixed versus dosimetric approaches, in spite of the fact that there is a suggestion for calculated doses > 150 microCi per gram of thyroid tissue (1).
An ablative dose of radioactive iodine to treat hyperthyroidism is advocated by numerous endocrinologists. However, the dose of radioactive iodine to be prescribed remains a matter of debate as to whether to opt for a fixed dose or an individualized calculated dosimetry.
To reduce to the complications of hyperthyroidism and to get a rapid response, a dose of 131I in the scope of 0.15–0.2 mci per gram of thyroid is preferred (9).
Although lower doses may be related to failure of achievement of the goal of therapy and re-exposure to the RAI treatment, higher doses of 131I may have its own potential risks of excessive radiation exposure to the patients and the surrounding community.
Our target was to achieve hypothyroidism with RAI treatment using a fixed dose in patients with hyperthyroidism as it is easier to manage patients with hypothyroidism with levothyroxine resulting in fewer complications, in contrast to treating hyperthyroidism with oral medications in the long term which may consequently result in undesirable effects of therapy in terms of cost and side effects (10).
Treating hyperthyroidism with oral medications has the unpredictability of calculating the optimal dose required to achieve euthyroidism, with a higher chance of recurring hyperthyroidism despite being on optimal dose once the euthyroidism is achieved. Treatment may also incline towards a state of hypothyroidism even after achieving euthyroidism on a fixed dose (11, 12).
In this study we used 15 mCi of 131I as a fixed dose for all patients, with the results showing persistent hyperthyroidism in 7.3% of the patients with the response rate being good in patients who had taken prior anti-thyroid medication.
The study also assessed different variables including age, gender, and patient’s nationality to see if it had an overall impact of the type of response.
Response was achieved within 4-6 months in about half the patients with the majority responding within 12 months of treatment and only 4% showing a response beyond 12 months. We did not have data on the RAI uptake to comment on whether it had an impact on the response rate.
Different studies have looked into the efficacy of treatment of hyperthyroidism with RAI therapy using fixed or calculate doses versus treatment with anti-thyroid drugs (ADT).
Chen and co-workers studied patients treated with calculated doses of RAI treatment over a period of nine year in a prospective study with the conclusion of a short cure time using 131I. The patients were treated with a dose of 8 mCi to 12 mCi. The patients did not get any prior treatment and the study concluded that the remission rate was higher in the 131I group in comparison to ATD group. Also noted was the lower recurrence of hyperthyroidism, persistent hyperthyroidism or long term hypothyroidism in the 131I treatment group.
At 100 months, their study showed that 100% of the patients achieved permanent hypothyroidism, with 24.4% and 62.2% patients converting to hypothyroid state at 6 months and 2 years respectively. In conclusion the authors demonstrated better cure rates with RAI therapy using a low dose of RAI than ATD, with lower relapse rate although with a higher rate of conversion to hypothyroid state (10). In comparison to our study, around half of our patients responded in the first 6 months and only 4% showed a response after 12 months.
In one randomized control trial by Abraham and Acharya, a higher success rate of eliminating hyperthyroidism of 71% was reported with a fixed dose in comparison to a 58% success rate with a calculated dose.
Nonetheless, the favorable outcome was conversely related to thyroid size in the fixed dose regimen and the success rate decreased to only 25% with increase in the thyroid gland volume. In larger thyroid volumes of more than 75 ml, a calculated dose had a better response of 45% positive result.
The study advocated a fixed dose of 550 MBq (15 mCi) as a fixed dose unless for patients with large goiters where a dose of 800 MBq (21.6 mCi) was recommended (2).
The recommended dose is comparable with our recommendation of 15 mCi as a fixed dose, however we cannot comment on the reason of failure in our study as the thyroid volume was not available in the patients data.
Traino and group studied three different calculated doses based on the thyroid gland volume and concluded that this approach avoided excess dose exposure, at the same time however effectively achieving the treatment goal. They found an absorbed dose of 400 Gray (Gy) to achieve the highest favorable outcome (13), thus also advocating the use of a fixed dose.
The variable response rate to treatment can be due to various factors. However, in a study by Vijayakumar V. and group, evaluating the different possible factors influencing the manifestation of hypothyroidism at 4-5 months following RAI therapy, concluded that no particular factor was responsible, and the occurrence of early hypothyroid was unpredictable (14).
Another study by Kristoffersen U. et al, included 72 patients to evaluate if there was any effect on the outcome of RAI treatment by the 24 h radioiodine uptake. The study concluded that when the RAI dose was calculated on the basis of 24 h RIU, outcome is poorer for patients with high 24 h RIU when compared with low 24 h RIU measured prior to treatment (15). Our study however could not assess whether the thyroid scan uptake had any inference on the treatment response.
However, different studies advocate different opinions. A meta-analysis with the objective to prove effectiveness of fixed dose versus calculated dose of RAI demonstrated equality of favorable outcome in estimated and calculated doses of radioiodine with inconclusive result for superiority (16).
While assessing the efficacy of calculated doses, a study by Schiavo and colleagues, demonstrated the outcome of 119 patients with Grave’s disease treated with calculated doses of RAI. The patients were followed up for 12 months post treatment, and the authors concluded that high level of individual dose optimization was required as only 53% of the patients were initially successfully cured for hyperthyroidism and the remainder required a higher dose titration. The desired outcome was then achieved in 89% of the patients (17).This shows a lower initial response rate and the need for further follow up for the patients requiring additional doses to reach the desired result.
Howarth and group tried to determine the minimal optimal therapeutic dose of radioactive iodine ablation for successful treatment of Grave’s disease. The conducted a randomized control prospective trial enrolling 58 patients with one group receiving a dose of 60 Gy and the other group receiving 90 Gy thyroid tissue absorbed dose. The latter group achieved hypothyroidism in higher rate (P=0.246) at 6 months. Those who did not respond in the low dose group had a larger thyroid gland mass (respective means: 35.9 ml versus 21.9 ml). No significant superiority was demonstrated by using a dose of 90 Gy (18).
When four different protocols of treatment based on calculated doses depending on thyroid gland weight were compared for efficacy by Calegaro JU and group, it was demonstrated in patients previously not subjected to anti thyroid medication, a low dose RAI (1 mCi/10 gm of estimated thyroid gland weight) protocol was effective in reducing Grave’s hyperthyroidism (19).
There remains controversy on the effect of RAI therapy and the use of antithyroid medications. This study also assessed the effect of prior ATD treatment on the response and demonstrated treatment failure with persistent hyperthyroidism in this group despite being on higher calculated dose protocol (19).
Adjunctive anti-thyroid drugs demonstrated failure of radioactive iodine treatment if given in the week prior to treatment with RAI, regardless of the drug prescribed. Such patients are at risk of treatment failure and have reduced risk of hypothyroidism (9).
Different fixed doses of 131I have been compared for efficacy with variable response rates.
In a study by Esfahani AF et al, there was no noted correlation of age, gender and the size of the gland with the outcome of the treatment in different groups of patients, although the dose given in each of the groups had a significant impact on the resulting outcome (P<0.003). The group given a smaller dose of 185 MBq (5mCi) had more non-responders, increased office visits, and persistence of hyperthyroidism. The group given a higher dose of 370 MBq (10mCi) of 131I had a better response to treatment and thus this study advocates the use of a dose of 370 (10mCi) MBq (20).
In another study by Alexander E. et al, over a seven year duration including 261 patients, the efficacy of a dose of 8 mCi was studied. 86% of the patients achieved the target of euthyroidism or hypothyroidism after 1 year of treatment, while 14% required a second treatment due to persistent hyperthyroidism. This study advocated the use of a higher dose of 131I in patients at risk of treatment failure including young patients, those with large glands, higher T4 levels and prior treatment with anti-thyroid medications (21).
Schneider D. and group conducted a retrospective review of multivariate analysis, in which higher T4 and methimazole treatment were associated with unsuccessful treatment with RAI ablation suggesting the use of higher doses of RAI in order to avoid repeated treatments or surgery for patients with persistent hyperthyroidism (22).
As literature shows variable experiences by using different approaches for treating hyperthyroidism, RAI ablation is the recommended treatment. Different doses have been compared with suggestion of high dose, calculated dose and fixed doses. Our study has shown the efficacy of a fixed high dose of 15 mCi 131I with good results and this is a practical approach for treating patients with hyperthyroidism.
Study limitations:
One of the limitation of our study is its inability to comment on the reason of treatment failure due to unavailability of data related to thyroid volume and RAI uptake.
The data on the gland size was not assessed, thus whether the treatment failure was due to a higher gland volume could not be assessed.
The 24 h uptake rate of thyroid scan was not available as a variable, and thus could not be assessed to see its effect on the response of therapy. Which type of hyperthyroidism had a better response or failure could was not assessed as well.
The study lost follow of the patients after 12 months so they could not be reassessed for complications or response beyond 12 months of therapy.
We could not also comment on the side effects of the RAI ablation as this was not documented consistently in the medical record.
When assessed for response to treatment, the patients were assessed on their follow up appointments which may have under estimated the actual time of achieving the target of hypothyroidism. However those patients who developed the symptoms of hypothyroidism were pre counseled to check TSH levels on developing any symptoms, so this difference may be minimal.
However, the result of this study is applicable to our daily practice although however more data to look into the causes of treatment failure would be of added advantage.
Conclusion:
Effective treatment for different types of Hyperthyroidism with a solitary dose of RAI of 15mCi 131I can be accomplished in majority of the patients, as is demonstrated in our study, with 94.4% the patients achieving a successful cure, and 7.3% unsuccessful rate for the initial treatment thus resulting in the requirement of additional doses of RAI in some patients.
Clearly Auctoresonline and particularly Psychology and Mental Health Care Journal is dedicated to improving health care services for individuals and populations. The editorial boards' ability to efficiently recognize and share the global importance of health literacy with a variety of stakeholders. Auctoresonline publishing platform can be used to facilitate of optimal client-based services and should be added to health care professionals' repertoire of evidence-based health care resources.
Journal of Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Intervention The submission and review process was adequate. However I think that the publication total value should have been enlightened in early fases. Thank you for all.
Journal of Women Health Care and Issues By the present mail, I want to say thank to you and tour colleagues for facilitating my published article. Specially thank you for the peer review process, support from the editorial office. I appreciate positively the quality of your journal.
Journal of Clinical Research and Reports I would be very delighted to submit my testimonial regarding the reviewer board and the editorial office. The reviewer board were accurate and helpful regarding any modifications for my manuscript. And the editorial office were very helpful and supportive in contacting and monitoring with any update and offering help. It was my pleasure to contribute with your promising Journal and I am looking forward for more collaboration.
We would like to thank the Journal of Thoracic Disease and Cardiothoracic Surgery because of the services they provided us for our articles. The peer-review process was done in a very excellent time manner, and the opinions of the reviewers helped us to improve our manuscript further. The editorial office had an outstanding correspondence with us and guided us in many ways. During a hard time of the pandemic that is affecting every one of us tremendously, the editorial office helped us make everything easier for publishing scientific work. Hope for a more scientific relationship with your Journal.
The peer-review process which consisted high quality queries on the paper. I did answer six reviewers’ questions and comments before the paper was accepted. The support from the editorial office is excellent.
Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery. I had the experience of publishing a research article recently. The whole process was simple from submission to publication. The reviewers made specific and valuable recommendations and corrections that improved the quality of my publication. I strongly recommend this Journal.
Dr. Katarzyna Byczkowska My testimonial covering: "The peer review process is quick and effective. The support from the editorial office is very professional and friendly. Quality of the Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions is scientific and publishes ground-breaking research on cardiology that is useful for other professionals in the field.
Thank you most sincerely, with regard to the support you have given in relation to the reviewing process and the processing of my article entitled "Large Cell Neuroendocrine Carcinoma of The Prostate Gland: A Review and Update" for publication in your esteemed Journal, Journal of Cancer Research and Cellular Therapeutics". The editorial team has been very supportive.
Testimony of Journal of Clinical Otorhinolaryngology: work with your Reviews has been a educational and constructive experience. The editorial office were very helpful and supportive. It was a pleasure to contribute to your Journal.
Dr. Bernard Terkimbi Utoo, I am happy to publish my scientific work in Journal of Women Health Care and Issues (JWHCI). The manuscript submission was seamless and peer review process was top notch. I was amazed that 4 reviewers worked on the manuscript which made it a highly technical, standard and excellent quality paper. I appreciate the format and consideration for the APC as well as the speed of publication. It is my pleasure to continue with this scientific relationship with the esteem JWHCI.
This is an acknowledgment for peer reviewers, editorial board of Journal of Clinical Research and Reports. They show a lot of consideration for us as publishers for our research article “Evaluation of the different factors associated with side effects of COVID-19 vaccination on medical students, Mutah university, Al-Karak, Jordan”, in a very professional and easy way. This journal is one of outstanding medical journal.
Dear Hao Jiang, to Journal of Nutrition and Food Processing We greatly appreciate the efficient, professional and rapid processing of our paper by your team. If there is anything else we should do, please do not hesitate to let us know. On behalf of my co-authors, we would like to express our great appreciation to editor and reviewers.
As an author who has recently published in the journal "Brain and Neurological Disorders". I am delighted to provide a testimonial on the peer review process, editorial office support, and the overall quality of the journal. The peer review process at Brain and Neurological Disorders is rigorous and meticulous, ensuring that only high-quality, evidence-based research is published. The reviewers are experts in their fields, and their comments and suggestions were constructive and helped improve the quality of my manuscript. The review process was timely and efficient, with clear communication from the editorial office at each stage. The support from the editorial office was exceptional throughout the entire process. The editorial staff was responsive, professional, and always willing to help. They provided valuable guidance on formatting, structure, and ethical considerations, making the submission process seamless. Moreover, they kept me informed about the status of my manuscript and provided timely updates, which made the process less stressful. The journal Brain and Neurological Disorders is of the highest quality, with a strong focus on publishing cutting-edge research in the field of neurology. The articles published in this journal are well-researched, rigorously peer-reviewed, and written by experts in the field. The journal maintains high standards, ensuring that readers are provided with the most up-to-date and reliable information on brain and neurological disorders. In conclusion, I had a wonderful experience publishing in Brain and Neurological Disorders. The peer review process was thorough, the editorial office provided exceptional support, and the journal's quality is second to none. I would highly recommend this journal to any researcher working in the field of neurology and brain disorders.
Dear Agrippa Hilda, Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery, Editorial Coordinator, I trust this message finds you well. I want to extend my appreciation for considering my article for publication in your esteemed journal. I am pleased to provide a testimonial regarding the peer review process and the support received from your editorial office. The peer review process for my paper was carried out in a highly professional and thorough manner. The feedback and comments provided by the authors were constructive and very useful in improving the quality of the manuscript. This rigorous assessment process undoubtedly contributes to the high standards maintained by your journal.
International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews. I strongly recommend to consider submitting your work to this high-quality journal. The support and availability of the Editorial staff is outstanding and the review process was both efficient and rigorous.
Thank you very much for publishing my Research Article titled “Comparing Treatment Outcome Of Allergic Rhinitis Patients After Using Fluticasone Nasal Spray And Nasal Douching" in the Journal of Clinical Otorhinolaryngology. As Medical Professionals we are immensely benefited from study of various informative Articles and Papers published in this high quality Journal. I look forward to enriching my knowledge by regular study of the Journal and contribute my future work in the field of ENT through the Journal for use by the medical fraternity. The support from the Editorial office was excellent and very prompt. I also welcome the comments received from the readers of my Research Article.
Dear Erica Kelsey, Editorial Coordinator of Cancer Research and Cellular Therapeutics Our team is very satisfied with the processing of our paper by your journal. That was fast, efficient, rigorous, but without unnecessary complications. We appreciated the very short time between the submission of the paper and its publication on line on your site.
I am very glad to say that the peer review process is very successful and fast and support from the Editorial Office. Therefore, I would like to continue our scientific relationship for a long time. And I especially thank you for your kindly attention towards my article. Have a good day!
"We recently published an article entitled “Influence of beta-Cyclodextrins upon the Degradation of Carbofuran Derivatives under Alkaline Conditions" in the Journal of “Pesticides and Biofertilizers” to show that the cyclodextrins protect the carbamates increasing their half-life time in the presence of basic conditions This will be very helpful to understand carbofuran behaviour in the analytical, agro-environmental and food areas. We greatly appreciated the interaction with the editor and the editorial team; we were particularly well accompanied during the course of the revision process, since all various steps towards publication were short and without delay".
I would like to express my gratitude towards you process of article review and submission. I found this to be very fair and expedient. Your follow up has been excellent. I have many publications in national and international journal and your process has been one of the best so far. Keep up the great work.
We are grateful for this opportunity to provide a glowing recommendation to the Journal of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy. We found that the editorial team were very supportive, helpful, kept us abreast of timelines and over all very professional in nature. The peer review process was rigorous, efficient and constructive that really enhanced our article submission. The experience with this journal remains one of our best ever and we look forward to providing future submissions in the near future.
I am very pleased to serve as EBM of the journal, I hope many years of my experience in stem cells can help the journal from one way or another. As we know, stem cells hold great potential for regenerative medicine, which are mostly used to promote the repair response of diseased, dysfunctional or injured tissue using stem cells or their derivatives. I think Stem Cell Research and Therapeutics International is a great platform to publish and share the understanding towards the biology and translational or clinical application of stem cells.
I would like to give my testimony in the support I have got by the peer review process and to support the editorial office where they were of asset to support young author like me to be encouraged to publish their work in your respected journal and globalize and share knowledge across the globe. I really give my great gratitude to your journal and the peer review including the editorial office.
I am delighted to publish our manuscript entitled "A Perspective on Cocaine Induced Stroke - Its Mechanisms and Management" in the Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery. The peer review process, support from the editorial office, and quality of the journal are excellent. The manuscripts published are of high quality and of excellent scientific value. I recommend this journal very much to colleagues.
Dr.Tania Muñoz, My experience as researcher and author of a review article in The Journal Clinical Cardiology and Interventions has been very enriching and stimulating. The editorial team is excellent, performs its work with absolute responsibility and delivery. They are proactive, dynamic and receptive to all proposals. Supporting at all times the vast universe of authors who choose them as an option for publication. The team of review specialists, members of the editorial board, are brilliant professionals, with remarkable performance in medical research and scientific methodology. Together they form a frontline team that consolidates the JCCI as a magnificent option for the publication and review of high-level medical articles and broad collective interest. I am honored to be able to share my review article and open to receive all your comments.
“The peer review process of JPMHC is quick and effective. Authors are benefited by good and professional reviewers with huge experience in the field of psychology and mental health. The support from the editorial office is very professional. People to contact to are friendly and happy to help and assist any query authors might have. Quality of the Journal is scientific and publishes ground-breaking research on mental health that is useful for other professionals in the field”.
Dear editorial department: On behalf of our team, I hereby certify the reliability and superiority of the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews in the peer review process, editorial support, and journal quality. Firstly, the peer review process of the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is rigorous, fair, transparent, fast, and of high quality. The editorial department invites experts from relevant fields as anonymous reviewers to review all submitted manuscripts. These experts have rich academic backgrounds and experience, and can accurately evaluate the academic quality, originality, and suitability of manuscripts. The editorial department is committed to ensuring the rigor of the peer review process, while also making every effort to ensure a fast review cycle to meet the needs of authors and the academic community. Secondly, the editorial team of the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is composed of a group of senior scholars and professionals with rich experience and professional knowledge in related fields. The editorial department is committed to assisting authors in improving their manuscripts, ensuring their academic accuracy, clarity, and completeness. Editors actively collaborate with authors, providing useful suggestions and feedback to promote the improvement and development of the manuscript. We believe that the support of the editorial department is one of the key factors in ensuring the quality of the journal. Finally, the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is renowned for its high- quality articles and strict academic standards. The editorial department is committed to publishing innovative and academically valuable research results to promote the development and progress of related fields. The International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is reasonably priced and ensures excellent service and quality ratio, allowing authors to obtain high-level academic publishing opportunities in an affordable manner. I hereby solemnly declare that the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews has a high level of credibility and superiority in terms of peer review process, editorial support, reasonable fees, and journal quality. Sincerely, Rui Tao.
Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions I testity the covering of the peer review process, support from the editorial office, and quality of the journal.
Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, we deeply appreciate the interest shown in our work and its publication. It has been a true pleasure to collaborate with you. The peer review process, as well as the support provided by the editorial office, have been exceptional, and the quality of the journal is very high, which was a determining factor in our decision to publish with you.
The peer reviewers process is quick and effective, the supports from editorial office is excellent, the quality of journal is high. I would like to collabroate with Internatioanl journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews journal clinically in the future time.
Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, I would like to express my sincerest gratitude for the trust placed in our team for the publication in your journal. It has been a true pleasure to collaborate with you on this project. I am pleased to inform you that both the peer review process and the attention from the editorial coordination have been excellent. Your team has worked with dedication and professionalism to ensure that your publication meets the highest standards of quality. We are confident that this collaboration will result in mutual success, and we are eager to see the fruits of this shared effort.
Dear Dr. Jessica Magne, Editorial Coordinator 0f Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, I hope this message finds you well. I want to express my utmost gratitude for your excellent work and for the dedication and speed in the publication process of my article titled "Navigating Innovation: Qualitative Insights on Using Technology for Health Education in Acute Coronary Syndrome Patients." I am very satisfied with the peer review process, the support from the editorial office, and the quality of the journal. I hope we can maintain our scientific relationship in the long term.
Dear Monica Gissare, - Editorial Coordinator of Nutrition and Food Processing. ¨My testimony with you is truly professional, with a positive response regarding the follow-up of the article and its review, you took into account my qualities and the importance of the topic¨.
Dear Dr. Jessica Magne, Editorial Coordinator 0f Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, The review process for the article “The Handling of Anti-aggregants and Anticoagulants in the Oncologic Heart Patient Submitted to Surgery” was extremely rigorous and detailed. From the initial submission to the final acceptance, the editorial team at the “Journal of Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions” demonstrated a high level of professionalism and dedication. The reviewers provided constructive and detailed feedback, which was essential for improving the quality of our work. Communication was always clear and efficient, ensuring that all our questions were promptly addressed. The quality of the “Journal of Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions” is undeniable. It is a peer-reviewed, open-access publication dedicated exclusively to disseminating high-quality research in the field of clinical cardiology and cardiovascular interventions. The journal's impact factor is currently under evaluation, and it is indexed in reputable databases, which further reinforces its credibility and relevance in the scientific field. I highly recommend this journal to researchers looking for a reputable platform to publish their studies.
Dear Editorial Coordinator of the Journal of Nutrition and Food Processing! "I would like to thank the Journal of Nutrition and Food Processing for including and publishing my article. The peer review process was very quick, movement and precise. The Editorial Board has done an extremely conscientious job with much help, valuable comments and advices. I find the journal very valuable from a professional point of view, thank you very much for allowing me to be part of it and I would like to participate in the future!”
Dealing with The Journal of Neurology and Neurological Surgery was very smooth and comprehensive. The office staff took time to address my needs and the response from editors and the office was prompt and fair. I certainly hope to publish with this journal again.Their professionalism is apparent and more than satisfactory. Susan Weiner
