Review for 10.1186/s12876-017-0714-6 (2017)

Reviewer ’s report  
 
Title: A long -surviving patient with advanced esophageal basaloid squamous cell carcinoma  
treated only with radiotherapy: case report and l iterature review  
 
Version: 0 Date: 02 Jul 2017  
 
Reviewer: Irene Coati  
 
Reviewer's report:  
 
The topic of this case report is interesting. A nyway, there are some important points to revise.  
 
 
The english level is unacceptable for publication; the text should be revised by a native speaker.  
 
 
The authors should ceck the text carefully because there are some mistakes (for example, in the 
abstract, the first sentence is incomplete).  
 
 
I suggest the authors to explain well what they mean with the term "other examinations" about 
the diagnosis of AEBSCC (in the "case presentation").  
 
 
In the text of "Discussion and Conclusions" the authors have to mention t he table 1.  
 
 
Furthermore, the authors have to mention the "Japanese Classification of Esophageal cancer" in 
the text. They used this classification more times without citing it.  
 
 
I suggest the authors to specify the table reports only japanese cases.  
 
 
 
Minor concerns:  
 
About the key words, "highly sensitive" is an adjective. In my opinion, it is not a correct type of 
key words. I suggest the authors to remove it from the key words.  
 
I suggest to use the abbreviations always, in order to obtain a simpler text.  
 
I suggest the authors to remove the words "author, year, age, etc." from the legend of the table 1, 
because in my opinion they are unnecessary.  
 
Are the methods appropriate and well described?  
If not, please specify what is required in your comments to the authors.  
 
Yes 
 
Does the work include the necessary controls?  
If not, please specify which controls are required in your comments to the authors.  
 
Yes 
 
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supporte d by the data shown?  
If not, please explain in your comments to the authors.  
 
Yes 
 
Are you able to assess any statistics in the manuscript or would you recommend an  
additional statistical review?  
If an additional statistical review is recommended, please spe cify what aspects require further  
assessment in your comments to the editors.  
 
Not relevant to this manuscript  
 
Quality of written English  
Please indicate the quality of language in the manuscript:  
 
Not suitable for publication unless extensively edited  
 
Declaration of competing interests  
Please complete a declaration of competing interests, considering the following questions:  
 
1. Have you in the past five years received reimbursements, fees, funding, or salary from an  
organisation that may in any way gain or lose financially from the publication of this  
manuscript, either now or in the future?  
 
2. Do you hold any stocks or shares in an organisation that may in any way gain or lose  
financially from the publication of this manuscript, either now or in the future?  
 
3. Do you hold or are you currently applying for any patents relating to the content of the  
manuscript?  
 
4. Have you received reimbursements, fees, funding, or salary from an organization that 
holds  or has applied fo r patents relating to the content of the manuscript?  
 
5. Do you have any other financial competing interests?  
 
6. Do you have any non -financial competing interests in relation to this paper?  
If you can answer no to all of the above, write 'I declare that I h ave no competing interests' 
below.  If your reply is yes to any, please give details below.  
 
I declare that I haveno competing interests  
 
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal. I understand that my name will be included  
on my report to the authors and, if the manuscript is accepted for publication, my named report  
including any attachments I upload will be posted on the website along with the authors'  
responses. I agree for my report to be made available under an Open Acc ess Creative Commons  
CC-BY license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ). I understand that any comments  
which I do not wish to be included in my named report can be included as confidential comments  
to the editors, which will not be published.  
  
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal