Review for 10.1186/s12876-017-0705-7 (2017)

Reviewer ’s report  
 
Title:  Two staging systems for gastrointestinal stromal tumors in the stomach: Which is better?  
 
Version: 1 Date: 11 Apr 2017 
 
Reviewer:  Prof.  Hou 
 
Reviewer’s report:  
 
In clinical practice, both  NIH and  UICC are not good criteria. First, the cut off of tumor size 
and mitosis are arbitrary, second, rare GIST develop lymph node metas tasis, why adopt tumor -
node -metastasis system adopted in cancer system, furthermore, in this manuscript, primary tumor 
with metastasis was excluded in "inclusion criteria (The exclusion criteria were distant 
metastasis at the time of surgery)", the authors  did not show how many patients with lymph node 
metastasis, if the cohort of patients without lymph node metastasis, the so -called TNM criteria  
only based on 1 parameter of T other than 3 parameters of T, N, M.  
  
Six patients (4.1%) were administered ima tinib mesylate as adjuvant treatment. The  6 patients 
might be excluded in the study  
 
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 supported by the data shown?  
If not, please explain in your comments to the authors.  
 
No 
 
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 specify what aspects require further 
assessment in your comments to the editors.  
 
I am able to assess the statistics  
 
Quality of written English  
Please indicate the quality of language in the manuscript:  
 
Acceptable  
 
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 a n 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 for 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 relat ion to this paper?  
 
If you can answer no to all of the above, write 'I declare that I have no competing interests' 
below. If your reply is yes to any, please give details below.  
 
I declare that I have no 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 Access Creative Commons 
CC-BY license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ). I understand that any comments 
which I do not wis h 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