Review for 10.1186/s12876-022-02267-0 (2022)

Reviewer’s report
Title: 
Signet-ring cell carcinoma of the duodenal bulb
presenting with gastrointestinal hemorrhage: a case report and literature review
Version: 
1 
Date: 
01 Mar 2022
Reviewer: 
Thomas Wichelmann
Reviewer's report:
Excellent revisions that have significantly improved the flow and writing of the
manuscript. The additional clinical information significantly improves the
quality of the case report. Very thorough discussion that covers main points of
case. Impressed with the significant changes that have been made by the authors.
Several small grammatical changes: 
Line 17: recommend changing "attempts" to "evaluations" given that "attempted"
is used after
Line 31: occurs should be occur
Line 62: consider changing "but with disappointing results" to "but hemostasis
was not achieved"
Line 68: consider rephrasing mucosal edema erosion 
Line 81-84 sentence: this could be simplified to just "Later, the patients hospital
course was complicated by ileus." Detail seems too much.
Line 99-100: confused about what is meant by this sentence and could use
clarification
Line 108: "has a good diagnosis" is confusing. Does this mean high
sensitivity/specificity? needs clarification
Line 117: "Surgical" should be "Surgery"
Line 130: add "a" before palliative operation
Line 154: "monoclonal" should be added before antibody
Paragraph lines 158-164: could probably omit this paragraph as it does not add
much to discussion
Line 172: would add "duodenal" before biopsy
Line 181: changed reported to "report"
Consider rewriting sentence 181-183 to: "The diagnosis of PDCs is difficult due
to mild and nonspecific presenting symptoms, normal or only minimally
elevated tumor markers, and low sensitivity of biopsies."
Publons Reviewer Recognition
. Springer Nature can send verification of this
review directly to Publons (a subsidiary of Clarivate Analytics). If you would
like to take advantage of this service, please click on the “Yes” option below.
Your name, email address, title of the reviewed manuscript, name of the journal,
and date of your review submission (the “Review Data”) will then be transmitted
to Publons after the final decision on the manuscript has been made. If you have
already registered at Publons, they will notify you of the receipt of this review
and update your profile 
as per your settings and their policy. If you are not
registered with Publons, you will receive an email from them asking you to
register in order for them to be able to recognize your review on your new
profile page. Publons may use the Review Data to generate derivative metadata
for the benefit of Publons and you as a reviewer, carefully considering the
sensitivity of such information. For example, Publons may verify your record as
a reviewer by updating your profile published on its webservice if you have
registered for such service or help editors to identify candidate reviewers. Please
find the details of processing in Publons’ privacy policy
https://publons.com/about/terms
Yes
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 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 relation 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.
None
Reviewer Publication Consent.
 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
) if this manuscript is accepted for
publication. Any comments that I do not wish to be included in the published
report have been included as confidential comments to the editor, which will not
be published.
If you are not happy for us to publish this report, please contact the
editorial office before completing the review.
If you wish, you can include your
name in your published report. Please note you must decide whether to include
your name at the start of the process and confirm this decision whenever
prompted. If you change your decision later, we will not be able to publish your
name.
I agree to the terms of the CC-BY 4.0 license; please publish my name with my
report.
Is the study design appropriate to answer the research question (including the use
of appropriate controls), and are the conclusions supported by the evidence
presented?
Yes
Are the methods sufficiently described to allow the study to be repeated?
Yes
Is the use of statistics and treatment of uncertainties appropriate?
Yes
Is the presentation of the work clear?
Yes
Are the images in this manuscript (including electrophoretic gels and blots) free
from apparent manipulation?
Yes