JerMa88/BMC_Gastroenterology_Peer_Reviews huggingface dataset:
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-14-101 (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:Physical Activity is Associated with Reduced Risk of Esophageal Cancer,
Particularly Esophageal Adenocarcinoma: A Systematic Review and
Meta-Analysis
Version:2Date:10 April 2014
Reviewer: Michael Leitzmann
Reviewer's report:
Major essential revisions:
One potential concern is that the current analysis principally focusses on EAC
and provides virtually no data on ESCC. Could you possibly have missed some
studies on physical activity and ESCC risk? Related to this, your literature review
was conducted over a year ago and may therefore not be current. For example, a
study by Dar et al. on occupational physical activity and ESCC was published in
September 2013 and should probably have been included in the meta-analysis.
The abstract states that physical activity may modify the effect of obesity on risk
for EAC. However, the manuscript did not address that specific question, so I
recommend removing that statement.
The Methods section states that effect estimates were pooled using a fixed
effects model if a study reported on more than one physical activity domain.
Please ensure that the assumption for that model was not violated (i.e., there
was no heterogeneity of effect estimates in the underlying studies).
The results section states that results remained statistically significant on
restricting analysis to high-quality studies. However, the upper limit of the 95%
confidence interval is 1.0 and therefore lacks formal statistical significance.
Minor essential revisions:
Reference number 34 contains typos in the author list.
The name of the author Huerta et al. is misspelled in the Tables and Figures.
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests.
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-14-101 (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:Physical Activity is Associated with Reduced Risk of Esophageal Cancer,
Particularly Esophageal Adenocarcinoma: A Systematic Review and
Meta-Analysis
Version:3Date:14 May 2014
Reviewer: Michael Leitzmann
Reviewer's report:
Please refer to my previous assessment.
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests.
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-14-98 (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:High glucose increased LPS induced DC apoptosis through modulation of
ERK1/2, AKT and Bax/Bcl-2
Version:2Date:23 January 2014
Reviewer: Daniel M Wall
Reviewer's report:
Major Compulsory Revisions:
(1) An abstract needs to be added.
(2) The figures and legends need to be improved. The figures have not
reproduced well and are difficult to interpret, especially the FACS data. In
addition it is unclear at times what the figures are supposed to show as the figure
legend does not describe exactly is shown. In particular the concept of 'apoptosis
ratio' is not explained or what it means or how it is calculated.
(3) Figure 5 is difficult to interpret as the GAPDH control appears to be stained
quite randomly with regions of intense or diffuse staining. These should be
addressed as I presumed the purpose was to show uniform staining in these
samples as otherwise it undermines what is shown with the other antibodies.
(4) There are grammatical issues throughout that need to be addressed as these
at times can make understanding the data more difficult. In addition,
abbreviations need to used and explained at their first use. None were included
for example for DC, ECL, LPS, NC or DAB within the first 3 pages.
(5) The reproducibility of Western blotting should be confirmed. No mention is
made of whether Westerns were repeated to ensure the observed result was not
a one off.
(6) The reason for measurement of nitric oxide in the supernatant of DCs is not
explained and it seems a strange thing to measure. The reasons for this should
be clarified.
Minor Essential Revisions:
(1) Spelling and grammatical errors throughout and the use of italics where
appropriate (e.g. in vitro and in vivo)
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Not suitable for publication unless extensively edited
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-14-98 (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:High glucose increased LPS induced DC apoptosis through modulation of
ERK1/2, AKT and Bax/Bcl-2
Version:2Date:23 January 2014
Reviewer: Jonathan Peterson
Reviewer's report:
Major Compulsory Revisions
Figure 1 and 2 axis labels are unreadable. From the arrows the data indicated
that the upper left corners (in fig 1A) are Live cells (An- and PI-) however you
have called these apoptotic cells (An+ PI -). Why are the axes not going in the
same direction for figure 1A and figure 2A? Why do the data from figures 1A and
2A not match figures 1B and 2B, respectively? How were the data in 1B and 2B
obtained?
For your Immunoblot please include refs or detail how GAPDH has been
established to be an appropriate control for these experiments. GAPDH is known
to be widely variable under certain conditions (such as metabolic stress). Also
figure 4 shows the representative blot; How many samples for each treatment
were used? Please include a bar graph with the mean and error of the quantified
data collected by the Alpha imager.
For NO quantification please include control cells with no LPS treatment for
comparisons.
Also, the variables analyzed are not always clear. Hard to judge the veracity of
the presented data.
Minor Essential Revisions
Please seek help in editorial review, many grammar mistakes were noted.
Please include the full name of terms the first time they are used within the
article. The Abbreviation “DC” was used in the title and second paragraph, but no
explanation of what DC stood for until the material and methods section. Other
abbreviations used without explaination include: BMDC, PI#K, MEK, Bcl-2, BAX,
LPS, PBS.
Please include blots of total Akt and ERK1/2.
It is not clear in the results or in the figures when the data is from the in vivo or in
vitro studies. Please clarify.
For figure 5, please include magnification of the image. Also it appears CTR
stands for the control staining, please verify.
Discretionary Revisions
For figure 3, please increase the brightness of the normal staining.
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Needs some language corrections before being
published
Statistical review: Yes, and I have assessed the statistics in my report.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-14-98 (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:High glucose increased LPS induced DC apoptosis through modulation of
ERK1/2, AKT and Bax/Bcl-2
Version:3Date:6 May 2014
Reviewer: Jonathan Peterson
Reviewer's report:
Major Compulsory Revisions
The authors completely addressed all my suggested major revisions. No further
major revisions noted.
Minor Essential Revisions
The authors completely addressed all my suggested minor revisions. No further
minor revisions noted.
Discretionary Revisions
The authors completely addressed all my suggested Discretionary Revisions
. No further Discretionary Revisions
noted.
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-14-98 (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:High glucose increased LPS induced DC apoptosis through modulation of
ERK1/2, AKT and Bax/Bcl-2
Version:3Date:11 May 2014
Reviewer: Daniel M Wall
Reviewer's report:
All suggested revisions have been dealt with.
The quality of written English has dramatically improved.
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-14-99 (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:Nutritional Status, Growth and Disease Management in Children with Single
and Dual diagnosis of Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus and Coeliac Disease
Version:1Date:7 March 2014
Reviewer: Iva Hojak
Reviewer's report:
Mackinder et al present an interesting study on the nutritional study and growth in
children with CD and T1DM.
The study is well conducted and results are nicely presented. Moreover, authors
have added also the review of all previously published studies.
I have only minor essential comments
• Introduction and discussion should be shorter, especially introduction. It should
be used only to reveal reasons why this study was performed.
• Clearly state limitations of the study
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: Yes, and I have assessed the statistics in my report.
Declaration of competing interests:
No competing interests
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-14-99 (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:Nutritional Status, Growth and Disease Management in Children with Single
and Dual diagnosis of Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus and Coeliac Disease
Version:1Date:28 April 2014
Reviewer: KATHLEEN ROSS
Reviewer's report:
Major reviews None
Minor reviews None
Discretionary reviews Difficult to assimilate all the informationat first reading,I feel
the results would benefit from being summarised in tabulated form.
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: Yes, but I do not feel adequately qualified to assess the
statistics.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare i have no competing interests
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-14-97 (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:Diagnostic sensitivity of carbohydrate deficient transferrin in heavy drinkers
Version:2Date:24 February 2014
Reviewer: Luca Morini
Reviewer's report:
The article is of interest and well designed.
Unfortunately the cohort of sample is too small to perform adequate statistical
analysis.
Discretionary revisions
The authors stated at the beginning of the introduction that CDT is the most
specific biomarker of heavy alcohol consumption. Actually, during the last
decade, ethyl glucuronide in hair showed a diagnostic specificity at least at the
same level of CDT, and sometimes even better. Therefore I would suggest to
rephrase the statement or to discuss CDT in comparison with EtG in hair.
Minor Essential revisions
Please add to the abbreviations: OR, SPSS, SD, HCV.
For a better understanding of Table 1 and 2, please add a legend describing the
meaning of P. Please be consistent with number of decimals in Table 1.
Major Compulsory Revisions
The main weakness of this article is the small number of samples analyzed.
Several studies, performed on a fairly greater cohort of subjects have already
been published on the same issue. Therefore in my opinion the authors should
discuss more in detailed what is the novelty of their study in comparison with the
previously published ones.
Level of interest: An article of limited interest
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-14-97 (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:Diagnostic sensitivity of carbohydrate deficient transferrin in heavy drinkers
Version:2Date:9 March 2014
Reviewer: Koji Uchino
Reviewer's report:
In this study, Fagan KJ et al. investigated the factors that affect diagnostic
sensitivity of carbohydrate deficient transferrin (CDT) in patients with sustained
heavy alcohol intake. The authors reported that the sensitivity of CDT based on a
threshold value of %CDT > 1.7 was 50% and that overweigh/obesity, female
gender and presence of cirrhosis were independently associated with
non-diagnostic %CDT.
Although the manuscript is well written and the findings are of interest, one main
concern is that the sample size is smaller than previous studies. Fifty-two
patients were included in this study, however, it is too small to determine the
factors that affect diagnostic sensitivity. Larger sample size would be needed to
obtain any conclusive results.
Specific comments
1) Diagnostic method of cirrhosis is unclear. How did the authors diagnose as
cirrhosis when liver biopsy was not performed ?
2) In the baseline characteristics of the patients, clinical factors such as serum
aminotransferases, gamma-glutamyltransferase, platelet count, and mean
corpuscular volume, which are essential in discussing alcoholic liver injury were
missing.
Level of interest: An article of limited interest
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: Yes, but I do not feel adequately qualified to assess the
statistics.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests.
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-14-96 (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:Up-Regulation of CNDP2 Facilitates the Proliferation of Colon Cancer
Version: 1Date:15 September 2013
Reviewer: Katarzyna Kilis-Pstrusinska
Reviewer's report:
The Authors studied the possible role of CNDP2 in colon cancer proliferation.
They applied two different approaches. Firstly, they analysed CNDP2 expression
in colon cancers and its relationship with clinico-pathological characteristics of
patients. Secondly, they studied the CNDP2 association with cell proliferation,
cell cycle progression and tumorigenicity.
The paper deserves attention. However, The Authors should improve it.
Major Compulsory Revisions
Introduction.
1. CNDP2, cytosol non-specific dipeptidase, is a member of the M20 family of
metalloproteases. The CNDP2 gene encodes CNDP2, not „ CNDP2 gene
belongs to the M20 family”. This sentence should be corrected.
2. The last sentences are unclear. Did the Authors publish the papers concerning
CNDP2 and colon cancer previously? The Authors wrote: “The strong CNDP2
expression that we observed in neoplastic colon cells and tumor tissues
suggested a potential role for CNDP2 in colon tumorigenesis. Knockdown of
CNDP2 reduced tumor cell growth, colony formation and inhibited colon cancer
cell (RKO) tumorigenicity in nude mice. Our work demonstrates that CNDP2
promotes cancer growth. Moreover, CNDP2 plays a significant role in different
colon locations”. If the results are from the current study, above sentences
should be given in the part Discussion.
Material and Methods
1. Lack the information concerning samples of colon mucosa and benign colon
diseases (BCD). What kind of BCD had the patients whose samples were
examined?
2. Please add the reference to TNM stages of colorectal cancer defined by the
WHO.
Discussion. Conclusions.
1. The limitations of the work aren’t stated.
2. EGFR, cyclin B1 and cyclin E were not a subject of the study. The Authors
analysed these proteins expression only for CNDP2. Therefore, the sentence in
part Conclusions “ EGFR, cyclin B1 (…) is unfounded and not the result of
current study.
Minor Essential Revisions
Abstract
The Authors wrote: „CNDP2 expression was markedly increased in clinical colon
tumors and colon cancer cell lines.” Compared with?
Table
Table 1: There are some mistakes, e.g. variales (variables?). CNDP2 expression
in the title and Kin17 expression in body of table. It is unclear.
The abbreviations used in the table 1 should be explained below it.
Figures
Figure legends contain legend for Figure 1-3 and S1-S2. There are figures 1 to 5
in the paper. These discrepancies should be corrected.
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a
statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests.
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-14-96 (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:Up-Regulation of CNDP2 Facilitates the Proliferation of Colon Cancer
Version: 1Date:2 October 2013
Reviewer: Wim Derave
Reviewer's report:
The current study explores the hypothesis that CNDP2 could be the link between
potential beneficial therapeutic effects of carnosine and bestatin in oncology. The
study is certainly valuable as it contains results from both patients and cells and
animal model, which all more or less point into the same direction that CNDP2 is
a potential therapeutic target for colon cancer.
The major concern relates to the fact that there is large controversy as to
whether carnosine is in fact a substrate of CN2, the enzyme produced by the
CNDP2 gene. Teufel et al. (JBC 2003) suggest that carnosine is not a substrate
under physiological conditions (so CNDP2 must have another function), whereas
Pandya et al. (Anal Biochem 2011) suggest it can cleave carnosine. This aspect
should be elaborated in both the introduction and the discussion and more
caution should be included.
Please also provide a description of the metabolism and (patho)physiological role
of carnosine and the role of the carnosinases herein (see recent review by
Boldyrev, Aldini & Derave, Physiological Reviews 2013).
Related to the above comment, in the discussion, the authors refer to the
signaling cascade in which CNDP2 is involved. This is not clear to me what is
meant here. I do not think CNDP2 is involved in a signaling cascade, but
products of enzymatic reaction may affect these proteins. The link between
EGFR, cyclin B1, cyclin E and carnosinase is unclear. These should not be
mentioned as ‘playing an important role’ as mentioned in the conclusions.
Page 4, line 13-14: The sentence ‘The CM samples consisted….’ is followed by
the sentence: ‘These samples displayed strong cytoplasmic staining…’. I think
this can lead to confusion as the CM show the weakest staining.
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Needs some language corrections before being
published
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a
statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
'I declare that I have no competing interests'
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-14-96 (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:Up-Regulation of CNDP2 Facilitates the Proliferation of Colon Cancer
Version:2Date:8 December 2013
Reviewer: Katarzyna Kilis-Pstrusinska
Reviewer's report:
The authors responded to the reviewer's comments and improved the manuscript
according to the comments.
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-14-96 (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:Up-Regulation of CNDP2 Facilitates the Proliferation of Colon Cancer
Version:2Date:9 December 2013
Reviewer: Wim Derave
Reviewer's report:
The responses and modifications based on my comments were somewhat
incomplete. Modifications were made on one place, but not systematically
applied to the entire manuscript.
One major concern was that there is little evidence to date whether CN2 is
involved in the degradation of carnosine. This was now adapted in the
discussion, but not in the abstract (CNDP2 degrades carnosine) and second
paragraph of introduction (‘it degrades carnosine’). The authors have no scientific
arguments to state that the reduced carcinogenesis and proliferation of colon
cancer cells associated with reduced CN2, is linked to the blunted degradation of
carnosine. It could be another –yet unclear- function of CN2 (unrelated to
carnosine). It is equally not clear where the carnosine would come from that
needs to be degraded. Is there endogenous concentration of carnosine in the
colon intestinal wall tissue? Or is it meant that the absorbed carnosine/anserine
from the diet is degraded by CN2. The latter seems not logical as
histidine-containing dipeptides are likely absorbed in the small intestine. In other
words, the physiological and pathophysiological rationale and working hypothesis
is still insufficiently elaborated.
Sufficient prudence and uncertainty should be included in the manuscript as to
the role of carnosine in this story.
Please systematically refer to CN2, when referring to the enzyme and protein,
and CNDP2 when referring to the gene. This applies to entire manuscript.
The number of typos and spelling errors is still substantial, especially in the
revised/added parts. Please have it revised by native English speaker.
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Needs some language corrections before being
published
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I have no competing interests
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-14-96 (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:Up-Regulation of CNDP2 Facilitates the Proliferation of Colon Cancer
Version:6Date:20 March 2014
Reviewer: Wim Derave
Reviewer's report:
The paper considerably improved and I have no further questions
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-14-95 (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:Prevalence of faecal incontinence and its related factors among patients in
a Malaysian academic setting.
Version:1Date:20 February 2014
Reviewer: Rick Nelson
Reviewer's report:
Minot R. You describe anal incontinence in your paper, not face al incontinence.
Flatus loss and anal seepage need to be separated from true anal incontinence
and the Wexner scale does not seem to have done that for you. Your population
is also skewed in that it was a population seeking health care and thus more
likely to have other problem such as dyschezia. You state in the intro that age is
a minor cause of incontinence compared with anal surgery and childbirth, yet
previous epidemiologic investigations have found age to be far more important,
along with IBS than the other two..
Having said all that your findings do ring true both in the gender distribution (what
about childbirth in men?) and comorbidities such as diabetes. Constipation as
well is an important finding and faecal retention with overflow needs to be part of
their evaluation.
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
'I declare that I have no competing interests'
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-14-95 (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:Prevalence of faecal incontinence and its related factors among patients in
a Malaysian academic setting.
Version:1Date:14 March 2014
Reviewer: massimo bellini
Reviewer's report:
It is a well written paper dealing with an interesting matter, the fecal incontinence.
It represents a very important and worldwide problem afflicting, often in a silent
way, many people, especially females.
It is highly appreciable that the authors underline the need to warrant targeted
healthcare interventions and to improve public awareness.
The aim of the study is clearly defined and the methods are sufficiently described
The data are easily understandable and the discussion and conclusions are well
balanced and adequately supported by the data.
Limitations of the work are clearly stated
Major comments
1)It is highly appreciable try to estimate the unknown prevalence of fecal
incontinence in Malysia, but it is highly debatable to evaluate it only in a
gynecological /surgical setting. Many patients are seen also by a
gastroenterologist and not only by gynecologists or surgeons. The authors
should discuss this issue
2)The median age of investigated patients was very low, it is probably affected by
the fact that obstetric patients are usually young.
3)How many patients were enrolled in O&G and how many in GS? It could
heavily affect the gender distribution.
4) It is a bit strange that no statistical significant relationship was observed
between FI and gender, even if the author report some data from the literature.
probably they should better discuss this issue and precise if males with FI are
older than females
5)It would be very interesting to know how many women were still fertile?
Menopause is a well known risk factor for the occurrence of FI.
6) Was the number of parts and / or pregnancies related in some way to FI?
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
'I declare that I have no competing interests'
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-14-95 (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:Prevalence of faecal incontinence and its related factors among patients in
a Malaysian academic setting.
Version:2Date:3 May 2014
Reviewer: massimo bellini
Reviewer's report:
The authors answered the questions addressed in my previous revison agreeing
to cleraly express some important limitations of the study.
I think the paper could be accepted.
Level of interest: An article of limited interest
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: Yes, but I do not feel adequately qualified to assess the
statistics.
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-14-95 (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:Prevalence of faecal incontinence and its related factors among patients in
a Malaysian academic setting.
Version:2Date:6 May 2014
Reviewer: Rick Nelson
Reviewer's report:
All issues addressed. I could go on and on about ascertainment bias, but that is a
problem with almost all reports in this field. The difference between what people
report (8.3%) and what constitutes the disease faecal incontinence in which
people smell in public places,or simply never go to public places, or who seek
medical treatment for their disease, all of which are much lower in prevalence
than reported rates such as yours, needs resolution. The Wexner scale has
multiple problems including not adequately separating flatus and seepage from
faecal incontinence and being frequency based, thus diminishing the importance
of constipation.
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-14-94 (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:Coexistence of HBsAg and anti-HBsAg in a HBeAg positive chronic
hepatitis B difficult-to-treat, wild type for mutations in rt and HBsAg ORFs: loss of
HBsAg with a combination of entecavir plus tenofovir.
Version:2Date:13 February 2014
Reviewer: Vincenza Calvaruso
Reviewer's report:
In this case report Galati et al. focused the attention on the interesting issue of
coexistence of HBsAg and anti-HBsAg in an singular case with previous
seroconversion HBeAb/HBeAg.
The case is interesting and fully described. However, Isuggest to revise the
english mostly in case report session. Indeed there are some too long sentences
which need to be shortened.
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Needs some language corrections before being
published
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I have no competing interests
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-14-94 (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:Coexistence of HBsAg and anti-HBsAg in a HBeAg positive chronic
hepatitis B difficult-to-treat, wild type for mutations in rt and HBsAg ORFs: loss of
HBsAg with a combination of entecavir plus tenofovir.
Version:2Date:3 March 2014
Reviewer: Samad Amini-Bavil-Olyaee
Reviewer's report:
Galati et al. reported a CHB patient with coexistence of HBsAg and anti-HBs
antibody. The case was subjected for treatment by different anti-HBV agents for
five years and finally sero-converted to anti-HBe antibody and loss of HBsAg
despite having no notable mutation at the Pol and HBsAg region. The case is
interesting and relevant and would be valuable to be considered for publication
as Case Report in the journal. Only few minor concerns should be addressed by
the authors as minor revision.
1- Please indicate the protective value of anti-HBs and please add which kit was
used to quantify this variable.
2- UI or IU, which one is correct, please makes sure to use the correct format in
the entire of the manuscript.
3- Please add the serological and virological information of the patient from 2003
to the Figure 1.
4- Please use the standard format to present mutational pattern in the table 1
e.g. rtG52A, or sG43A.
5- In the first line of the case report, it is mentioned that the patient was admitted
to “our” hospital. Please exactly indicate which hospital and where.
6- Have any family member of the patients diagnosed by HBV infection?
7- If biochemical data is available for all time-points (especially serum ALT level),
should be added to the Figure 1.
8- To me, the title is too long and complex and it would be better to be
summarized.
Note to AE: I would suggest “Minor Revision”.
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Needs some language corrections before being
published
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests.
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-14-93 (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:Paneth cell metaplasia in newly diagnosed inflammatory bowel disease in
children
Version:2Date:24 December 2013
Reviewer: Chris Dekaney
Reviewer's report:
The goal of this manuscript was to describe the presence of Paneth cell
metaplasia in newly diagnosed inflammatory bowel disease in children. The data
clearly demonstrates an increase in Paneth cell numbers in most colonic regions
in children with diagnosed IBD. While it is important to have an understanding of
how to define Paneth cell metaplasia in children there are several
issues/questions that need to be addressed.
Major Compulsory Revisions
1. What was the authors’ hypothesis for this study?
2. The control biopsies were taken from patients who had IBD-like symptoms. Is
it possible that the presence of Paneth cells in these patients were abnormal due
to the gastrointestinal issues they were having? Is it possible to follow up with
those patients to determine if they ultimately were diagnosed with IBD?
3. How are Paneth cells defined (i.e. H&E, lysozyme)? This should be noted in
the methods.
4. The authors should define acute and chronic inflammation. How were they
scored? Please define architectural distortion. How was it scored?
5. The authors mention no correlation of the degree of acute or chronic
inflammation or architectural distortion with Paneth cell number. The data for
acute and chronic inflammation and architectural distortion should be included in
the manuscript.
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: Yes, but I do not feel adequately qualified to assess the
statistics.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests.
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-14-93 (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:Paneth cell metaplasia in newly diagnosed inflammatory bowel disease in
children
Version:3Date:14 February 2014
Reviewer: Chris Dekaney
Reviewer's report:
The authors have addressed my concerns.
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests.
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-14-93 (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:Paneth cell metaplasia in newly diagnosed inflammatory bowel disease in
children
Version:3Date:15 February 2014
Reviewer: Ilyssa Gordon
Reviewer's report:
The authors have done an excellent job in responding to the initial comments. I
find no further major revisions needed for this paper.
Minor essential revisions:
1. Results paragraph 1, 4th sentence "antiinflammatories" is misspelled
2. Discussion paragrph 1, second to last sentence change "TH" to "the"
Discretionary revision:
1. Figure 1: may want to put asterisks etc on the plot and in the figure legend to
show significant p-values
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: Yes, but I do not feel adequately qualified to assess the
statistics.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests.
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-14-92 (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:Increasing late stage and mortality of colorectal cancer demonstrates the
need for screening: a population based study in Ireland, 1994-2010.
Version:2Date:24 February 2014
Reviewer: Robert J.C. Steele
Reviewer's report:
This is an interesting and well written article that has important implications for
colorectal cancer strategies in Ireland. My only comment is that the title is rather
misleading as increasing mortality was only seen in the rectal cancer.
Level of interest: An article of outstanding merit and interest in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-14-92 (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:Increasing late stage and mortality of colorectal cancer demonstrates the
need for screening: a population based study in Ireland, 1994-2010.
Version:2Date:27 February 2014
Reviewer: Andrew McKay
Reviewer's report:
The authors have addressed an important topic – the trends in colorectal cancer
in Ireland prior to the introduction of a screening problem. This is a nicely done
and well-written paper. I do have a few comments:
1. I agree that the trend towards a later stage at diagnosis is very likely due to a
stage migration phenomenon due to better staging, especially with the increased
availability and increased quality of CT and other imaging. Does the available
data set contain any information about the use of preoperative investigations
such as the use of CT or other imaging? Are there other recent papers which
have also found this trend and/or attempted to explain it?
2. The rise in ASMR’s for rectal cancer is a concerning finding that does require
more research. The authors suggest that underuse of preoperative radiotherapy
may be partly to blame. Moving from a time where preoperative radiation was
rarely used to a more recent time where preoperative therapy is considered
standard and more commonly used really should not cause the ASMR’s to go up.
At least it is not intuitive that it should happen. If preoperative treatment is
underused, there really should be no change.
I wonder if the increase in neoadjuvant/preoperative radiation or chemoradiation
could be responsible for this finding, but in a different way. Rectal cancers are
treated differently than colon cancers, so it is important to distinguish between
the two sites of disease. The ICD-10 system contains three codes for colorectal
cancer – C18 for colon cancer, C20 for rectal cancer, and C19 for cancers of the
rectosigmoid junction. Categorizing a tumor as a rectosigmoid cancer, rather
than as a colon or rectal cancer is problematic since a decision really must be
made to treat the tumor according to the paradigm for colon cancer or the
paradigm for rectal cancer, not something in between. With the modern use of
neoadjuvant chemoradiation, physicians who treat rectal cancer are much more
aware of the need to accurately determine if it is rectal or colon cancer. Thus, the
ICD-10 code for rectosigmoid cancer may be used much less frequently in later
years. There may have been a considerable number of upper rectal caners that
in early years were called colon cancers (rectosigmoid lesions) when in later
years they were more correctly labeled as rectal cancers. Since these tumors
carry a slightly worse prognosis than colon cancers, this may have resulted in an
artificial decrease in ASMR’s for colon cancer and an artificial increase in ASMR
for rectal cancer. Was there a decrease over time in the proportion of
rectosigmoid cancers that could explain this?
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-14-92 (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:Increasing late stage and mortality of colorectal cancer demonstrates the
need for screening: a population based study in Ireland, 1994-2010.
Version:2Date:3 March 2014
Reviewer: Jan Willem J.W.W Coebergh
Reviewer's report:
My comment
I am confused by this article,
How can survival improve so strongly (without explanation, e.g. more adjuvant
therapy, by better staging (i.e. higher % of positive nodes) but that is not shown?
While the proportion of stage III and IV increased>Is it a good idea to t
Might an alternative explanation be that the rate and proportion of pT1 and pT2
declined, because there was (much) more opportunistic screening ?
In most countries we see an increase of incidence in males (see Arnold paper)
Why is the paper of Arnold et al. Not referred ton coming from the DREG ECO
website ?
In fact autors are trying to measure progress against colorectal cancer and
whether screening can add to progress. Most likely given the very high incidence
rates in Ireland 1990-2007
I would also advise to look at 2 trend papers of incidence, mortality and survival
by
- van Steenbergen et al. For colon carcinoma
- and Elferink et al. for rectal carcinoma published in 2010
Why don’t we see a figure with incidence and mortality trend for males and
females in Ireland?
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-14-90 (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:Sigmoid colon cancer arising in a diverticulum of the colon with involvement
of the urinary bladder: a case report and review of the literature
Version:1Date:15 February 2014
Reviewer: Giacomo Puppa
Reviewer's report:
This is a well presented case report.
The images are high quality, documenting the lesions.
It deserves to be published
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-14-90 (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:Sigmoid colon cancer arising in a diverticulum of the colon with involvement
of the urinary bladder: a case report and review of the literature
Version:1Date:17 February 2014
Reviewer: Motohiro Kojima
Reviewer's report:
Major compulsory revisions
Level of interest: An article of limited interest
Quality of written English: Needs some language corrections before being
published
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests.
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-14-90 (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:Sigmoid colon cancer arising in a diverticulum of the colon with involvement
of the urinary bladder: a case report and review of the literature
Version:3Date:30 April 2014
Reviewer: Motohiro Kojima
Reviewer's report:
My concerns were successfully solved in this version. And we agree to accept
this manuscript.
Level of interest: An exceptional article
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests.
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-14-91 (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:Acid Suppress Agents and Risk of Mycobacterium Tuberculosis: A
Population-Based, Case-Control Study
Version:1Date:28 November 2013
Reviewer: Malaisamy Muniyandi
Reviewer's report:
This paper deals with an important subject of examined the association between
acid-suppressive agents and tuberculosis. The authors made good attempt but
the methodology needs some clarifications, results presentation is not clear and
discussion to be strengthened.
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Needs some language corrections before being
published
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-14-91 (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:Acid Suppress Agents and Risk of Mycobacterium Tuberculosis: A
Population-Based, Case-Control Study
Version:2Date:11 March 2014
Reviewer: Puja Myles
Reviewer's report:
Most of my comments have been addressed but two minor points need to be
addressed:
1. The authors have acknowledged in the response that they did not further
investigate long term versus short term acid suppressant therapy. This is fine but
must be acknowledged in the discussion as a gap that needs to be addressed by
future research.
2. The multivariable model building strategy is still not clear in the methods. I
suggest that the methods include a list of a priori covariates/confounder
variables. If all these a priori covariates were included in the multivariable model,
then please say so clearly. If on the other hand, a statistical selection procedure
was used to determine a more parsimonious model, then please state this and
clarify what the statistical selection procedure was.
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Needs some language corrections before being
published
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I have received an unrestricted educational grant from F. Hoffman- La Roche for
research in the area of pandemic influenza. This is not related in any way to the
content of the paper I have reviewed.
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-14-91 (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:Acid Suppress Agents and Risk of Mycobacterium Tuberculosis: A
Population-Based, Case-Control Study
Version:2Date:13 March 2014
Reviewer: Malaisamy Muniyandi
Reviewer's report:
Authors made efforts to improve the manuscript. The current version is seems to
be suitable for publication
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-14-89 (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:Fast food diet with CCl4 micro-dose induced hepatic-fibrosis -A Novel
animal model
Version:1Date:10 February 2014
Reviewer: Carmine Finelli
Reviewer's report:
High priority for publication
Level of interest: An article of outstanding merit and interest in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
'I declare that I have no competing interests'
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-14-89 (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:Fast food diet with CCl4 micro-dose induced hepatic-fibrosis -A Novel
animal model
Version:1Date:13 February 2014
Reviewer: Ivana Mikolasevic
Reviewer's report:
Dear Sir
I have read this manuscrip with a great interest. This topic is of interesting and
the manuscript is well-constructed. The article is written in a good English.
I suggest the acceptation of this manuscript.
Sincerely, Ivana Mikolasevic
Level of interest: An article of outstanding merit and interest in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests below
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-14-89 (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:Fast food diet with CCl4 micro-dose induced hepatic-fibrosis -A Novel
animal model
Version:3Date:23 March 2014
Reviewer: Dina Tiniakos
Reviewer's report:
Minor essential revisions
1. Methods, Pathology, staging of fibrosis: Please add “modified from” when
referring to the study of Kleiner et al, 2005 in the text and in additional file 1
because the staging method described is not exactly the same. In additional file
1, the title of the 2nd column should be changed to “Fibrosis” and “per sinusoidal”
(stage 1, degree of severity) should be spelled correctly. In additional file 2,
inflammation according to Kleiner et al (2005) is scored per x20 HPF not x40 as
wrongly stated. Please correct and mention in the text that sections were also
examined x20.
2. Results, paragraph 5: The exact topography of steatohepatitic lesions should
be included (perivenular, periportal/septal or both?).
3. Results: In Table 4 the title of the 1st column “Fibrosis scores” should be
changed to “Histological scores” since other features in addition to fibrosis are
evaluated.
4. References: Please delete sentence in bold at the end of reference 25.
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: Yes, but I do not feel adequately qualified to assess the
statistics.
Declaration of competing interests:
'I declare that I have no competing interests'
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-14-89 (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:Fast food diet with CCl4 micro-dose induced hepatic-fibrosis -A Novel
animal model
Version:4Date:12 April 2014
Reviewer: Dina Tiniakos
Reviewer's report:
The authors have satisfactorily addressed all minor comments raised.
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: Yes, but I do not feel adequately qualified to assess the
statistics.
Declaration of competing interests:
No competing interests
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-14-86 (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:Presentation, aetiology and treatment of adult intussusception in a tertiary
Sub-Saharan Hospital: a 10 year retrospective study
Version:2Date:8 December 2013
Reviewer: michele amoruso
Reviewer's report:
Minor Essential Revisions
It is unclear whether the diagnostic CT was used, it would be useful to report the
impact it has had about the timing of surgery and the surgical tactics.
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Needs some language corrections before being
published
Statistical review: Yes, but I do not feel adequately qualified to assess the
statistics.
Declaration of competing interests:
'I declare that I have no competing interests'