JerMa88/BMC_Gastroenterology_Peer_Reviews huggingface dataset:
Review for 10.1186/s12876-023-02964-4 (2023)

Title: Non-Alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease and socioeconomic determinants in an Iranian cohort
study
Version: 4 Date: 27 Aug 2023
Reviewer's report:
Dear editor,
After correcting the following points, the manuscript is approved by me:
In the figures of the article, the variables used in the horizontal and vertical columns should be
added to the figures.
In the tables, the unit of variables should be added. For example, age unit (years), energy intake
unit (Kcalories per day) and...
Best Regards,
Review for 10.1186/s12876-023-02959-1 (2023)

Title: Study on the factors influencing the prognosis after perianal abscess surgery
Version: 1 Date: 08 Mar 2023
Reviewer's report:
This study analyzes factors for recurrence or delayed healing after perianal abscess treatment,
and is significant in that a large number of patients were analyzed in a single institution.
However, it is too insufficient to publish as a scientific manuscript. Because of the many
limitations of the methodology, the results have to be redrawn.
This study appears to be a retrospective design conducted by a single institution in China. It
seems better to omit the expression “in china” from the title because it can confuse the reader
with the whole of China.
It seems good to present p-values in each paragraph for statistically significant factors in the
abstract.
It should be shortened leaving only essential sentences in the introduction.
Showing a flow chart of patient selection will help make the authors’ article more persuasive.
The reviewer recommended classifying the group that does not heal after surgical drainage as
“Unhealed”, and the case of recurrence after complete recovery as “Recurrence”. What is not
healed and what recurs after being healed must be distinctly different.
In Table 2, you need to specifically write the p-value.
The classification of the location of the abscess cavity is also ambiguous. It seems better to
classify them as perianal, ischioanal, intersphincteric and supralevator.
The reviewer doesn't know what high blood routine examinations mean. Whether it is WBC or
CRP, a specific test name is required.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-023-02959-1 (2023)

Title: Study on the factors influencing the prognosis after perianal abscess surgery
Version: 1 Date: 29 Mar 2023
Reviewer's report:
The study focuses on  the influence of clinical characteristics and diagnosis and treatment
methods of perianal abscess on postoperative recurrence or formation of anal fistula. Anal fistula
is a  disease prone to relapse and the research point is interesting. However, there are some
fundamental problems needed to be solved.
1. Surgery plays a critical role in curing anal fistula, surgery related factors such as surgeon
experience, details of surgery approach were not included in the analysis.
2. The study design lacks of innovation and the conclusion seems not different from previous
studies.
3. The figures and tables are redundant. Some figures and tables are no need to be displayed,
while the important information like demographic data were missing.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-023-02959-1 (2023)

Title: Study on the factors influencing the prognosis after perianal abscess surgery
Version: 2 Date: 16 Jun 2023
Reviewer's report:
1. The Revised manuscript still did not specify what the abnormal Preoperative blood routine
was. If there is an abscess, there is an increase in WBC or CRP, so it does not seem to be normal.
2. The Wexner Fecal Incontinence Scoring System in Table 1 is already widely known, so it
is better to omit it.
3. There is a mixture of unhealed and uncured. Terminology needs to be unified.
4. In the figure, the number of unhealed and cured groups is the same. Numbers need to be
corrected. Also, it is better to delete the sentence at the bottom.
5. If you cannot change the location of the abscess cavity I recommend, it would be better to
draw a picture of the exact location of the abscess cavity described by the authors and write
down the frequency for that area.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-023-02957-3 (2023)

Title: The role of apheresis and insulin therapy in hypertriglyceridemic acute pancreatitis - a
concise review
Version: 1 Date: 23 Jul 2023
Reviewer:  Ulrich Julius
Reviewer's report:
This review summarizes the current knowledge about HTG-induced acute pancreatitis both with
respect to pathophysiology and to therapy. The current literature is very well taken into account.
The reviewer agrees with the conclusions drawn by the author.
There remains one open question: does the author believe that the removal of cytokines or
of C-reactive protein which are described for apheresis therapy plays a role with respect to
the effectiveness of this extracorporeal treatment in patients with severe acute hyperlipidemic
pancreatitis? Any data available?
Minor comments
Introduction: “lipid apheresis” should be replaced by lipoprotein apheresis (lipoproteins are
removed, no delipidation takes place)
Pathogenesis: “10 mmol/L (approx. equal to 1000 mg/dL)” – 10 mmol/L equals to 882 mg/dL
Conservative treatment: “Heparin releases endothelial lipase, which has only a transient effect
and later actually reduces lipolytic activity” – it is not understandable how endothelial lipase
reduces lipolytic activity – this sentence should be rewritten.
The authors should describe how the insulin is given as an infusion – in the glucose solution or
separately with the help of an infusion machine.
Improvement: “retrospective comparison of DFPF” – correct DFPP
Review for 10.1186/s12876-023-02957-3 (2023)

Title: The role of apheresis and insulin therapy in hypertriglyceridemic acute pancreatitis - a
concise review
Version: 1 Date: 09 Aug 2023
Reviewer's report:
I read carefully your manuscipt, in fact this is an excellent concise overview of the subject.
During the review of the manuscript , I did not notice any significant errors in content or form,
so I support acceptance of the overview for publication.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-023-02957-3 (2023)

Title: The role of apheresis and insulin therapy in hypertriglyceridemic acute pancreatitis - a
concise review
Version: 2 Date: 11 Sep 2023
Reviewer:  Ulrich Julius
Reviewer's report:
The author followed my recommendations in general. The paper can now be accepted in the
present form.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-023-02975-1 (2023)

Title: PTEN-induced kinase 1 gene single-nucleotide variants as biomarkers in adjuvant
chemotherapy for colorectal cancer: a retrospective study
Version: 1 Date: 23 Jul 2023
Reviewer's report:
PTEN-induced kinase 1 gene single-nucleotide variants as biomarkers in adjuvant chemotherapy
for colorectal cancer
Journal Name: BMC Gastroenterology
This study aimed to find an early prognostic marker for CRC disease recurrence through deep
sequencing analysis for some autophagy related genes. In the 84 analyzed specimens, they found
single-nucleotide variants c.1018G>A or c.1562A>C of the mitophagy-related gene PTEN-
induced kinase 1 to be significantly associated with the low rate of recurrence in patients treated
with 5-FU based therapy. I summarized my comments:
1. Please provide legend each table in the main text or in the supplementary describing the data
presented, any abbreviations, and statistical analysis used to measure the significance.
2. Please present data as count and % not count only.
3. Please write at the end of the Material and Methods section; the statistical procedure in detail
and the survival measurement how it is calculated?
4. How recurrence was evaluated (radio, pathology, clinical …), is it local or distant, and what
were the main sites of recurrence?
5. How long did the treatment with 5-FU based therapy last? Was there any discontinuation, or
signs of toxicity in patients with the detected mutations?
6. The results showed significant differences only for the mutation in PINK1 to be associated
with the non-recurrence of CRC disease, suggesting to cause low expression in the transcripts
and proteins, is there a chance to test that in patient`s tissue samples with the appropriate
antibodies via immunohistochemistry?
Review for 10.1186/s12876-023-02969-z (2023)

Title: Accessory hepatic vein recanalization for Budd-Chiari syndrome: a systematic review
and meta-analysis
Version: 2 Date: 27 Mar 2023
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for inviting me to review this article.
The authors have neatly summarised the data related to AHV recanalization in this patient group
of 377 patients from 12 retrospective studies.  Additionally they have been able to compare
outcomes to direct HV recanalization in some studies.  The overall outcomes as published are
acceptable and this may offer an alternative therapy for BCS.
However, the demographics give information about the type of BCS obstruction, but do not give
any additional details about aetiology or presence of co-morbidity.  This would be useful in
assessing the overall survival data, which seems to be good.
The outcome measures focus on technical success and 1/5 year mortality.  It would be useful
to see some additional clinical data (such as resolution of ascites or  requirement for liver
transplant).
The manuscript describes the technical success of this procedure, which may have a role in the
management of BCS.  However, it would be useful to correlate this with some information about
the underlying aetiology of BCS and the clinical data (such as resolution of ascites/LT) prior to
final publication. This would allow the data to be more applicable to 'real world patient decision
making'.
Manuscript suggested edits:
Abstract Results, Page 2: should "relative to HC recanalazation" read "relative to HV
recanalazation"?
Review for 10.1186/s12876-023-02969-z (2023)

Title: Accessory hepatic vein recanalization for Budd-Chiari syndrome: a systematic review
and meta-analysis
Version: 2 Date: 10 Aug 2023
Reviewer's report:
PEER REVIEWER ASSESSMENTS:
OBJECTIVE - Full research articles: is there a clear objective that addresses a testable research
question(s) (brief or other article types: is there a clear objective)?
Yes - there is a clear objective
DESIGN - Is the current approach (including controls and analysis protocols) appropriate for
the objective?
Yes - the approach is appropriate
EXECUTION - Are the experiments and analyses performed with technical rigor to allow
confidence in the results?
Yes - experiments and analyses were performed appropriately
STATISTICS - Is the use of statistics in the manuscript appropriate?
Yes - appropriate statistical analyses have been used in the study
INTERPRETATION - Is the current interpretation/discussion of the results reasonable and not
overstated?
Yes - the author's interpretation is reasonable
OVERALL MANUSCRIPT POTENTIAL - Is the current version of this work technically
sound? If not, can revisions be made to make the work technically sound?
Probably - with minor revisions
PEER REVIEWER COMMENTS:
GENERAL COMMENTS: Thank you for allowing me to review this interesting work. I have
the following comments.
1. Abstract - What is HC recanalization? Need to expand this or is this an error?
2. Methods – The authors provided key words for database search. This is insufficient as a full
search strategy for at least 1 database should be provided in a way that is reproducible.
3. Methods – The authors did not mention regarding inclusion of abstracts. Were they included
or not and what was the rationale?
4. Results – The authors assessed publication bias analysis using Egger’s for all outcomes
including those with <10 studies as well. Usually, the publication should not be assessed if
no. of studies are <10. I suggest the authors remove these. (https://handbook-5-1.cochrane.org/
chapter_10/10_4_3_1_recommendations_on_testing_for_funnel_plot_asymmetry.htm)
5. Results – Did the studies provide stratified results based on how recanalization was achieved?
Stent insertion, balloon dilation, etc.
6. What about use of anticoagulation? Were the results any different based on type of
anticoagulation used?
7. The authors should also include in the limitations that all studies originated from one country
which questions the generalizability of the results.
8. Was the recanalization procedure performed by interventional radiology or vascular ? Please
add this in table 2.
9. I did not see the MOOSE checklist associated with this Meta. Please provide that.
ADDITIONAL REQUESTS/SUGGESTIONS:
I have included the comments above. The manuscript may be accepted for publication if above
comments are satisfactorily answered and the manuscript is modified.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-023-02969-z (2023)

Title: Accessory hepatic vein recanalization for Budd-Chiari syndrome: a systematic review
and meta-analysis
Version: 3 Date: 13 Sep 2023
Reviewer's report:
PEER REVIEWER ASSESSMENTS:
OBJECTIVE - Full research articles: is there a clear objective that addresses one or several
testable research questions? (Brief or other article types: is there a clear objective?)
Yes - there is a clear objective
DESIGN - Is the current approach (including controls and analysis protocols) appropriate for
the objective?
Yes - the approach is appropriate
EXECUTION - Are the experiments and analyses performed with sufficient technical rigor to
allow confidence in the results?
Yes - experiments and analyses were performed appropriately
STATISTICS - Is the use of statistics in the manuscript appropriate?
Yes - appropriate statistical analyses have been used in the study
INTERPRETATION - Is the current interpretation/discussion of the results reasonable and not
overstated?
Yes - the author's interpretation is reasonable
OVERALL MANUSCRIPT POTENTIAL - Has the author addressed your concerns sufficiently
for you to now recommend the work as a technically sound contribution? If not, can further
revisions be made to make the work technically sound?
Yes - current version is technically sound
PEER REVIEWER COMMENTS:
GENERAL COMMENTS: The authors have satisfactorily address the points I raised. The
manuscript can accepted.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-023-02973-3 (2023)

Title: A Survey on Helicobacter pylori infection rate in Hainan Province and analysis of related
risk factors
Version: 3 Date: 22 Aug 2023
Reviewer's report:
The manuscript by Chen al aims to explore the prevalence and potential risk factors of
Helicobacter pylori infection in Hainan Province, China. This is an epidemiological status
survey on the prevalence of Helicobacter pylori infection, and the data presented in the
manuscript largely support their conclusion. This study has been of some value, the following
is a synopsis of concerns raised based on the data presented in the manuscript.
Major:
1) The methodology does not seem to mention the goodness-of-fit test of the model and
the predictive power of the model, please add this when available. E.g. Hosmer-Lemeshow
goodness-of-fit test and plotting of Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves can be
performed.
2) The authors mentioned "family history of gastric cancer" as a protective factor in both the
abstract and the results, which seems to be a surprising result. Such a result may lead to an
opposite conclusion to the previous one. In the discussion, the authors provide an explanation
for this. However, no clear data and previous literature were given to support this. In the cohort
of subjects included by the authors, what percentage of subjects with a family history of gastric
cancer received screening and eradication therapy? The authors are advised to be cautious in
their conclusions regarding this variable.
3) It is recommended that the inclusion criteria for the subjects of the study be described in
detail; the methodology in the manuscript does not elaborate on this section.
Some minor comments:
1) Bacterial names should be italicized. This applies to the Figure legends as much as anywhere
else.
2#In section "2.2 Questionnaire", what's the definition of BIM and is it BMI?
3) Section "2.4 Definition" seems to be consistent with some of the variable definitions in section
"2.2 Questionnaire", can they be effectively integrated?
4#Please note that all P-values need to be shown in italics.
5#What are the manifestations of "gastrointestinal symptoms", please add a description in the
appropriate section of the Methodology.
6) Manuscript should have a uniform paragraph format.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-023-02973-3 (2023)

Title: A Survey on Helicobacter pylori infection rate in Hainan Province and analysis of related
risk factors
Version: 3 Date: 02 Sep 2023
Reviewer's report:
The authors surveyed the prevalence of H. pylori infection in Hainan Province and provided
important primary data to identify factors strongly associated with H. pylori infection in the area.
The following are my comments.
1. What is the reason for using the Carbon-14 urea breath test (14C-UBT) instead of 13C-UBT
for H. pylori infection test?
2. We assume that the subject's characteristics and lifestyle habits were obtained through a self-
administered questionnaire. However, did the researcher confirm the content of these answers
with the study subject in person? If there is a difference in educational history, the accuracy of
the answers may vary depending on how the questionnaire is taken. Please clarify.
3. You discussed that the prevalence of H. pylori might be lower in those with a family history of
gastric cancer because they are more likely to be screened and treated for H. pylori eradication,
but have you examined whether there is an association between a history of H. pylori eradication
and a family history of gastric cancer?
Minor confirmation
Could the BIM in the "2.2 Questionnaire" section be a mistake for BMI?
Review for 10.1186/s12876-023-02978-y (2023)

Title: Factors contributing to flares of ulcerative colitis in North India- A case-control study
Version: 2 Date: 31 Mar 2023
Reviewer:  Bincy Abraham
Reviewer's report:
Wonderful assessment of determining etiology of flares in a specific population.
Few comments:
Did alternative meds include any ayurvedic treatment?
Also, were all the patients that took alternative meds take it after discontinuing their IBD therapy
or was it taken as adjunct therapy.
In the addiction question, was there adequate reasoning for patients to include other drugs
besides alcohol (marijuana, any illegal drug use, etc)?
It is interesting to note the very small number of biologics & small molecules.
Consider using a different term than "painkiller";
the term is suggestive of narcotic medication.
Consider pain medications
Please also clarify what were the nonNSAIDs, (was this acetominophen/ equivalent, or did this
include narcotic medications, or others? )
AFter the sentence with 22 reference, what does the (Reference) signify?  Did the authors have
another reference to place here?
*Recommend highlighting/ bolding the predictors that were significant in Table 2 and similarly
highlighting the thiopurine use that was significant in Table 1.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-023-02978-y (2023)

Title: Factors contributing to flares of ulcerative colitis in North India- A case-control study
Version: 2 Date: 08 Apr 2023
Reviewer:  Dawesh P Yadav
Reviewer's report:
What were the most common antibiotics?
Pain killers were NSAIDS , Opiods or antispasmodics? As NSAIDS are notorious for flares
Review for 10.1186/s12876-023-02978-y (2023)

Title: Factors contributing to flares of ulcerative colitis in North India- A case-control study
Version: 4 Date: 25 Sep 2023
Reviewer's report:
I thank the authors for the revision. The authors have answered all queries satisfactorily. There
are no further suggestions or comments from my side.
Thank you
Review for 10.1186/s12876-023-02968-0 (2023)

Title: Combined use of CDAI and blood indices for assessing endoscopic activity in ileocolic
Crohn’s disease
Version: 1 Date: 04 Jun 2023
Reviewer's report:
I am very pleased to have had the opportunity to review this manuscript.
This study shows that evaluating a comprehensive index using clinical activity and peripheral
blood markers used in clinical practice can serve as a substitute for the endoscopic assessment
of CD activity. This manuscript may need the following revisions:
Major
Introduction
#Although the authors list blood, stool, urine and colonic tissue as biomarkers for CD, their
explanation is insufficient (Page 5, Line 102). Please add explanation and citation.
Results
#In this study, analysis of leukocyte differentiation is also performed. Neutrophils in particular
are affected by immunosuppression, can authors describe medication at enrollment?
Discussion
#In this study, the ratio of PLT to lymphocytes percentage was shown to be a factor that reflects
endoscopic activity. Although it is shown as a statistical analysis result, by what mechanism is
the lymphocyte percentage affected in CD activity?
#Did the ROC analysis of CRP and comprehensive index show a significant difference?
Comprehensive index seems to be complicated in scoring. Considering this complexity, isn't it
enough to evaluate only with CRP?
Minor
#Add an explanation of HB that first appeared (Page 12, Line 222)
Review for 10.1186/s12876-023-02968-0 (2023)

Title: Combined use of CDAI and blood indices for assessing endoscopic activity in ileocolic
Crohn’s disease
Version: 1 Date: 09 Jul 2023
Reviewer:  Bhaskar Kante
Reviewer's report:
Congratulations Authors, The paper addressed a clinically relevant question for non-invasive
follow-up Crohn's disease.  The manuscript was well written with appropriate statistics. I have
a few comments mentioned below
Minor :
1. Use another reference citing the epidemiology
2. It was mentioned in the discussion “However, in our study, the correlation between PRO and
SESCD was worse than that between CDAI and SES CD”
Please mention the analysis in the supplementary section
3. The title of the paper doesn't sound well. come up with a better title
4. Stick to word either ileocolic or ileocolonic in the whole manuscript
Major :
1. Subscoring of SES CD
Can you do an analysis of the correlation between absence of ulceration in SES CD and the new
comprehensive index
STRIDE II consensus highlights either the absence of ulcerations in SES CD or SES CD <3
should define mucosal healing
Review for 10.1186/s12876-023-02968-0 (2023)

Title: Combined use of CDAI and blood indices for assessing endoscopic activity in ileocolic
Crohn’s disease
Version: 2 Date: 03 Aug 2023
Reviewer:  Bhaskar Kante
Reviewer's report:
Dear Author,  I am glad to read the reply for the comments point by point. The manuscript is
well modified with comments made by reviewers in a constructive manner. Here are my few
comments
1. The inclusion of CALM  trial in introduction in the section of CDAI. Please reframe the
paragraph as it doesn’t convey the message clearly
2. As mentioned in table 1 about medications
Immunosupressants can we assume it as azathiopurine and methotrexate
which can frequently cause cytopenia
Can we negate the medication affect on assessment of PLr and its correlation with endoscopic
activity?
3.   Line no 72 change structuring to stricturing
Review for 10.1186/s12876-023-02962-6 (2023)

Title: Zerumbone ameliorates the inflammatory response and organ damage in severe acute
pancreatitis via the ROS/NF-#B pathway
Version: 2 Date: 04 Mar 2023
Reviewer:  Sahar H. Orabi
Reviewer's report:
1-The manuscript should be carefully revised for typos and grammatical errors
2-Describe also on which base you select the dose of Zerumbone
3-In commercial kits, please add the company, and catalog number.
4-Assessment of serum biochemical parameters needs to be explained in more detail in the
methods.
5-please insert  ethical approval number
6-please mention  age of rat
7- please mention source of rats in your study
Review for 10.1186/s12876-023-02962-6 (2023)

Title: Zerumbone ameliorates the inflammatory response and organ damage in severe acute
pancreatitis via the ROS/NF-#B pathway
Version: 4 Date: 14 Jul 2023
Reviewer's report:
PEER REVIEWER ASSESSMENTS:
OBJECTIVE - Full research articles: is there a clear objective that addresses one or several
testable research questions? (Brief or other article types: is there a clear objective?)
Yes - there is a clear objective
DESIGN - Is the current approach (including controls and analysis protocols) appropriate for
the objective?
Yes - the approach is appropriate
EXECUTION - Are the experiments and analyses performed with sufficient technical rigor to
allow confidence in the results?
Yes - experiments and analyses were performed appropriately
STATISTICS - Is the use of statistics in the manuscript appropriate?
Yes - appropriate statistical analyses have been used in the study
INTERPRETATION - Is the current interpretation/discussion of the results reasonable and not
overstated?
Yes - the author's interpretation is reasonable
OVERALL MANUSCRIPT POTENTIAL - Has the author addressed your concerns sufficiently
for you to now recommend the work as a technically sound contribution? If not, can further
revisions be made to make the work technically sound?
Yes - current version is technically sound
PEER REVIEWER COMMENTS:
GENERAL COMMENTS: I have checked the revised MS: ''Zerumbone ameliorates the
inflammatory response and organ damage in severe acute pancreatitis via the ROS/NF-#B
pathway''. All comments raised during previous review round have been addressed to my
satisfaction. The language is of acceptable standard.
ADDITIONAL REQUESTS/SUGGESTIONS:
No
Review for 10.1186/s12876-023-02962-6 (2023)

Title: Zerumbone ameliorates the inflammatory response and organ damage in severe acute
pancreatitis via the ROS/NF-#B pathway
Version: 4 Date: 28 Jul 2023
Reviewer:  Sahar H. Orabi
Reviewer's report:
- please insert age and weight of rat
- from where rat come
-In commercial kits, please add the company, and catalog number.
-Assessment of serum biochemical parameters need to be explained in more details in the
methods.
-Discussion needs to be improved by linking all the parameters together.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-023-02962-6 (2023)

Title: Zerumbone ameliorates the inflammatory response and organ damage in severe acute
pancreatitis via the ROS/NF-#B pathway
Version: 6 Date: 24 Aug 2023
Reviewer's report:
PEER REVIEWER ASSESSMENTS:
OBJECTIVE - Full research articles: is there a clear objective that addresses one or several
testable research questions? (Brief or other article types: is there a clear objective?)
Yes - there is a clear objective
DESIGN - Is the current approach (including controls and analysis protocols) appropriate for
the objective?
Yes - the approach is appropriate
EXECUTION - Are the experiments and analyses performed with sufficient technical rigor to
allow confidence in the results?
Yes - experiments and analyses were performed appropriately
STATISTICS - Is the use of statistics in the manuscript appropriate?
Yes - appropriate statistical analyses have been used in the study
INTERPRETATION - Is the current interpretation/discussion of the results reasonable and not
overstated?
Yes - the author's interpretation is reasonable
OVERALL MANUSCRIPT POTENTIAL - Has the author addressed your concerns sufficiently
for you to now recommend the work as a technically sound contribution? If not, can further
revisions be made to make the work technically sound?
Yes - current version is technically sound
PEER REVIEWER COMMENTS:
GENERAL COMMENTS: I have checked the revised MS. All corrections made are to my
satisfaction. The MS has been improved and ready to be published.
ADDITIONAL REQUESTS/SUGGESTIONS:
NO
Review for 10.1186/s12876-023-02958-2 (2023)

Title: Biochemical and histopathological evidence for beneficial effects of empagliflozin
pretreatment on acetic acid-induced colitis in rats
Version: 2 Date: 27 Jan 2023
Reviewer's report:
"PEER REVIEWER ASSESSMENTS:
OBJECTIVE - Full research articles: is there a clear objective that addresses a testable research
question(s) (brief or other article types: is there a clear objective)?
Yes - there is a clear objective
DESIGN - Is the current approach (including controls and analysis protocols) appropriate for
the objective?
Yes - the approach is appropriate
EXECUTION - Are the experiments and analyses performed with technical rigor to allow
confidence in the results?
Yes - experiments and analyses were performed appropriately
STATISTICS - Is the use of statistics in the manuscript appropriate?
Yes - appropriate statistical analyses have been used in the study
INTERPRETATION - Is the current interpretation/discussion of the results reasonable and not
overstated?
Yes - the author's interpretation is reasonable
OVERALL MANUSCRIPT POTENTIAL - Is the current version of this work technically
sound? If not, can revisions be made to make the work technically sound?
Probably - with minor revisions
PEER REVIEWER COMMENTS:
GENERAL COMMENTS: The study was well conducted, although some improvements and
clarifications of information are required. The objectives of the research are clear, the study
design and execution are appropriate, and the interpretation of data is correct.
The manuscript reported the potential use of an anti-diabetic drug, empagliflozin, in the
treatment of ulcerative colitis (UC).
All the methods used are conventional and established methods.
This work is proposing empagliflozin as a new drug for the treatment of inflammatory bowel
disease (IBD).
Other researchers researching in this area (UC and IBD) may, among any other further studies,
compare and contrast the efficacy of existing treatments with empagliflozin to further ascertain
the potential of this drug in clinical practice.
REQUESTED REVISIONS:
There were numerous grammatical and typographical errors throughout the manuscript. The
authors should carefully proofread the manuscript before submission.
The Methodology section needs to include the strain, gender, and age of the animals.
The Discussion section can be improved - present in various paragraphs to improve the
readability of the manuscript. The authors may consider discussing the possible mechanism
underlying the beneficial effects of Empa on UC, and how does Empa, which act on a receptor
in the kidney, ameliorates oxidative stress in the colon.
It may be useful to include the health status of other organs following treatment with acetic acid
and Empa – would Empa also improve any pathological damages to these organs induced by
acetic acid?"
Review for 10.1186/s12876-023-02958-2 (2023)

Title: Biochemical and histopathological evidence for beneficial effects of empagliflozin
pretreatment on acetic acid-induced colitis in rats
Version: 3 Date: 02 Mar 2023
Reviewer:  Paul Aimé Noubissi
Reviewer's report:
Biochemical and histopathological evidence for beneficial effects of empagliflozin pretreatment
on acetic acid-induced colitis in rats
Background: Ulcerative Colitis (UC) is a chronic disorder with oxidative stress playing a critical
role in its pathogenesis via upregulation of pro-inflammatory markers in colonic tissues. .
Results:  write “Furthermore, a significant increase in catalase (P<0.01), superoxide dismutase
(p<0.001), and glutathione peroxidase (p<0.01) activities was observed by EMPA pretreatment
when compared to AA group. These results were in line with those of the reference drug.”
Not
“Furthermore, a significant increase in catalase (P<0.01), superoxide dismutase (p<0.001),
and glutathione peroxidase (p<0.01) activities were observed by EMPA pretreatment when
compared to AA group. These results were in line with the results of the reference drug.”
Conclusions:
From the abstract conclusion, one can think the only ulcerative colitis symptom is the oxidative
stress. What about the colon weight/length ratio, macroscopic and histological score?
Background
Write “Investigations reported the potential anti-inflammatory, anti-oxidative and anti-apoptotic
properties of EMPA which could also exert possible beneficial effects on colitis.” rather
than “Investigations reported the potential anti-inflammatory, anti-oxidative and anti-apoptotic
properties of EMPA that could exert its possible beneficial effects on colitis too”
Experimental design
Rephrase this statement “(3) EMPA 10 mg/kg administered once per day treated group in AA-
induced colitis rats (AA+ EMPA); (4) Dexa 8 mg/kg per day administered group in AA-induced
colitis rats (AA + Dexa).”
Evaluation of antioxidant enzyme activity and oxidative stress biomarkers
Write “In brief, to 0.1 ml of tissue homogenate were added 0.9 ml of 1.8% sodium dodecyl
sulfate (SDS), 1.5 ml of 20% acetic acid solution (pH 3.5), and 1.5 ml of aqueous solution of
Thio barbituric acid.”
rather than
“In brief, 0.1 ml of tissue homogenates were added 0.9 ml of 1.8% sodium dodecyl sulfate
(SDS), 1.5 ml of 20% acetic acid solution (pH 3.5), and 1.5 ml of aqueous solution of Thio
barbituric acid.”
95oC correct to 95°C
Effect of empagliflozin on oxidative stress and antioxidant activity
- It is highly recommended to add some digital results rather than elastic sentences. Don’t just
write … significantly lower, significantly decreased, significantly increased, …. Write more
digital results.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-023-02958-2 (2023)

Title: Biochemical and histopathological evidence for beneficial effects of empagliflozin
pretreatment on acetic acid-induced colitis in rats
Version: 3 Date: 21 Mar 2023
Reviewer's report:
"PEER REVIEWER ASSESSMENTS:
OBJECTIVE - Full research articles: is there a clear objective that addresses one or several
testable research questions? (Brief or other article types: is there a clear objective?)
Yes - there is a clear objective
DESIGN - Is the current approach (including controls and analysis protocols) appropriate for
the objective?
Yes - the approach is appropriate
EXECUTION - Are the experiments and analyses performed with sufficient technical rigor to
allow confidence in the results?
Yes - experiments and analyses were performed appropriately
STATISTICS - Is the use of statistics in the manuscript appropriate?
Yes - appropriate statistical analyses have been used in the study
INTERPRETATION - Is the current interpretation/discussion of the results reasonable and not
overstated?
Yes - the author's interpretation is reasonable
OVERALL MANUSCRIPT POTENTIAL - Has the author addressed your concerns sufficiently
for you to now recommend the work as a technically sound contribution? If not, can further
revisions be made to make the work technically sound?
Probably - with minor revisions
PEER REVIEWER COMMENTS:
GENERAL COMMENTS: The authors had responded to some of the comments, but not all
comments were satisfactorily addressed.
The manuscript needs revision.
ADDITIONAL REQUESTS/SUGGESTIONS:
The manuscript does not read well. I suggest that the authors have the manuscript sent for
professional services/editing.
There are still typo-graphical errors and inconsistencies in the format and symbols used.
Not all the comments given previously were addressed. The Discussion specifically. I strongly
suggest that it is put into different paragraph to improve the readability of the section.
It remains unclear as to how Empa, which acts on a receptor in the kidney, ameliorates oxidative
stress in the colon."
Review for 10.1186/s12876-023-02958-2 (2023)

Title: Biochemical and histopathological evidence for beneficial effects of empagliflozin
pretreatment on acetic acid-induced colitis in rats
Version: 5 Date: 28 Apr 2023
Reviewer's report:
"PEER REVIEWER ASSESSMENTS:
OBJECTIVE - Full research articles: is there a clear objective that addresses one or several
testable research questions? (Brief or other article types: is there a clear objective?)
Yes - there is a clear objective
DESIGN - Is the current approach (including controls and analysis protocols) appropriate for
the objective?
Yes - the approach is appropriate
EXECUTION - Are the experiments and analyses performed with sufficient technical rigor to
allow confidence in the results?
Yes - experiments and analyses were performed appropriately
STATISTICS - Is the use of statistics in the manuscript appropriate?
Yes - appropriate statistical analyses have been used in the study
INTERPRETATION - Is the current interpretation/discussion of the results reasonable and not
overstated?
Yes - the author's interpretation is reasonable
OVERALL MANUSCRIPT POTENTIAL - Has the author addressed your concerns sufficiently
for you to now recommend the work as a technically sound contribution? If not, can further
revisions be made to make the work technically sound?
Probably - with minor revisions
PEER REVIEWER COMMENTS:
GENERAL COMMENTS: I do not think the authors have made every effort to improve the
writing of the manuscript.
ADDITIONAL REQUESTS/SUGGESTIONS:
Please have the manuscript sent to native English speaker or professional services to check for
the language. At the minimum, the authors should proof read the manuscript carefully before
re-submitting the manuscript!"
Review for 10.1186/s12876-023-02958-2 (2023)

Title: Biochemical and histopathological evidence for beneficial effects of empagliflozin
pretreatment on acetic acid-induced colitis in rats
Version: 5 Date: 19 May 2023
Reviewer:  Paul Aimé Noubissi
Reviewer's report:
Biochemical and histopathological evidence for beneficial effects of empagliflozin pretreatment
on acetic acid-induced colitis in rats
This study aimed to validate the biochemical and histopathological evidence for beneficial
effects of empagliflozin pretreatment on acetic acid-induced colitis in rats. However, there are
some minor problems that need to be addressed.
Abstract
Results
- The abstract might present the only source of knowledge for many researchers who has no
access to the whole work, therefore it is highly recommended to add some digital results in the
abstract rather than elastic sentences. The authors should include values in the result section of
the abstract. At the moment, they are barely described.
Experimental design
- How did you measure the colon length?
Results
- On Fig 1., it was indicated that ## stands for p < 0.01 vs. AA group. How can you explain
that the Empa group with the weight-to-length ratio of 81.00 ± 5.28 mg/cm and the AA + Dexa
group with 81.80 ± 4.18 mg/cm were significantly different compared to AA group; and not the
control group with 58.80 ± 5.69 mg/cm?
- Fig 3 lacks the magnification power. It has to be written directly under the diagram.
Effect of empagliflozin on oxidative stress and antioxidant activity
- Why did you not evaluate the levels of some pro or anti-inflammatory cytokines in colonic
tissue homogenate?
Discussion
- “In the current study application of AA disturbed the colonic mucus” How did you evaluate
that? Because there was no result on the amount of colonic mucus!
- In general, English editing is required.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-023-02958-2 (2023)

Title: Biochemical and histopathological evidence for beneficial effects of empagliflozin
pretreatment on acetic acid-induced colitis in rats
Version: 6 Date: 25 Jun 2023
Reviewer's report:
PEER REVIEWER ASSESSMENTS:
OBJECTIVE - Full research articles: is there a clear objective that addresses one or several
testable research questions? (Brief or other article types: is there a clear objective?)
Yes - there is a clear objective
DESIGN - Is the current approach (including controls and analysis protocols) appropriate for
the objective?
Yes - the approach is appropriate
EXECUTION - Are the experiments and analyses performed with sufficient technical rigor to
allow confidence in the results?
Yes - experiments and analyses were performed appropriately
STATISTICS - Is the use of statistics in the manuscript appropriate?
Yes - appropriate statistical analyses have been used in the study
INTERPRETATION - Is the current interpretation/discussion of the results reasonable and not
overstated?
Yes - the author's interpretation is reasonable
OVERALL MANUSCRIPT POTENTIAL - Has the author addressed your concerns sufficiently
for you to now recommend the work as a technically sound contribution? If not, can further
revisions be made to make the work technically sound?
Probably - with minor revisions
PEER REVIEWER COMMENTS:
GENERAL COMMENTS: Responded but inadequate. Some improvement in the writing but it
is doubtful that the manuscript has gone through thorough English editing, or was proof read.
ADDITIONAL REQUESTS/SUGGESTIONS:
Abbreviations can be used for terms that appeared repeatedly in the manuscript. If an
abbreviation is used, use it when the term is appearing for the first time in the manuscript, and
keeping it throughout the manuscript. Spell out all abbreviations.
Some content in the Discussion should be in the Introduction section, specifically, description
of the measuring parameters - the Discussion section should focus on discussing the results of
the study and not introducing SOD, CAT, MDA, etc. Dexamethasone seemed to be significantly
better than EMPA in reversing the pathological changes induced by acetic acid, but EMPA was
used at a higher concentration than dexamethasone. The study showed an acute effect of EMPA.
But UC is a chronic disease. What do authors foresee the potential use of EMPA in the long-
term treatment of UC?
Review for 10.1186/s12876-023-02948-4 (2023)

Title: Effect of Empagliflozin and Pioglitazone on Left Ventricular Function in Patients with
Type Two Diabetes and Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease without Established Cardiovascular
Disease: A Randomized Single-blind Clinical Trial
Version: 1 Date: 04 Jan 2023
Reviewer's report:
Comments
The authors conducted the clinical trial to investigate the effect of pioglitazone and empagliflozin
on liver steatosis and fibrosis, and left ventricular function. There are several concerns to be
addressed.
Major
1. Study design in the method section. The authors should describe how the informed consent
of the participants were obtained.
2. Study design. The authors say this is double-blind trial but the patients can know which is
which by the shape and color of the compound using the web search? This reviewer thinks that
present study is single-blind test without placebo.
3. Discussion should be organized. Structure of the paragraphs is weird. For example, first
paragraph consists of only 2 sentences. Description about the mechanism of SGLT2 inhibitor
cites only one literature (about Santos-Gallego et al) but the paragraph for pioglitazone is too
long.
4. Sample size was calculated based on the previous paper (Akelbrom A, et al) which
investigated the GLS in T2DM, suggesting that sample size to test the effect on hepatic
pathogenesis of NAFLD is unclear. The authors described that 70 subjects were needed. Is it
for one group or total number of the subjects?
5. The authors should mention about the previous reports which investigated GLS or LV function
on T2DM with SGLT2 inhibitor and/or pioglitazone. Thinking about the high prevalence of
NAFLD in T2DM, advantage of the present study which included NAFLD patients with T2DM
is not so strong.
6. Overall, English editing by profession editor is mandatory.
Minor
1. Abstract, line 4 and overall. “P”ioglitazone ,“E”mpagliflozin. color “D”oppler There are
several capitalized first letter of the words in the sentences.
2. Abstract, line 7. Definition of “Active control”. Because the present study compared the effect
pioglitazone and empagliflozin, there is no appropriate control group. What does “active control”
mean?
3. All abbreviations in the main document should be spelled-out even though they are in the
abstract. Abstract is generally independent part in the manuscript.
4. Participant in the method section. Inclusion criteria and exclusion criteria should be
clearly described here. How was the “established” ASCVD was defined? Also, only ASCVD
was identified here rather than CVD? No limitation for age? How were the viral hepatitis,
autoimmune hepatitis and PBC/PSC excluded?
5. Procedure section is too long and need to be divided.
6. Outcomes measured in the method section. FIB-4 score should be FIB-4 index. NAFLD
fibrosis risk score is probably NAFLD fibrosis score? CAP score should be described as “CAP”
or “CAP measurement”.
7. Statistics. Please don’t use p=0.00. p < 0.01 or p < 0.001 is better.
8. Appendix 2 was not cited in the manuscript.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-023-02948-4 (2023)

Title: Effect of Empagliflozin and Pioglitazone on Left Ventricular Function in Patients with
Type Two Diabetes and Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease without Established Cardiovascular
Disease: A Randomized Single-blind Clinical Trial
Version: 4 Date: 28 Jun 2023
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for addressing my comments.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-023-02948-4 (2023)

Title: Effect of Empagliflozin and Pioglitazone on Left Ventricular Function in Patients with
Type Two Diabetes and Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease without Established Cardiovascular
Disease: A Randomized Single-blind Clinical Trial
Version: 6 Date: 06 Sep 2023
Reviewer's report:
PEER REVIEWER ASSESSMENTS:
OBJECTIVE - Full research articles: is there a clear objective that addresses one or several
testable research questions? (Brief or other article types: is there a clear objective?)
Yes - there is a clear objective
DESIGN - Is the current approach (including controls and analysis protocols) appropriate for
the objective?
Yes - the approach is appropriate
EXECUTION - Are the experiments and analyses performed with sufficient technical rigor to
allow confidence in the results?
Yes - experiments and analyses were performed appropriately
STATISTICS - Is the use of statistics in the manuscript appropriate?
Yes - appropriate statistical analyses have been used in the study
INTERPRETATION - Is the current interpretation/discussion of the results reasonable and not
overstated?
Yes - the author's interpretation is reasonable
OVERALL MANUSCRIPT POTENTIAL - Has the author addressed your concerns sufficiently
for you to now recommend the work as a technically sound contribution? If not, can further
revisions be made to make the work technically sound?
Yes - current version is technically sound
PEER REVIEWER COMMENTS:
GENERAL COMMENTS: The authors adequately responded on all previous questions.