Review for 10.1186/s12876-021-01645-4 (2021)

Reviewer’s report
Title: 
Polygenic Risk Score is a Predictor of Adenomatous Polyps at Screening
Colonoscopy
Version: 
0 
Date: 
29 Oct 2020
Reviewer's report:
The authors reported the association between SNPs-based GRS and
adenomatous polyps at screening colonoscopy. This study is interesting, but it
requires some additional information to present usefulness of GRS for the
personalized colonoscopy strategies.
1) The low and high GRS groups is quite a few compared to the intermediate
group. What is the basis for this classification? Is GRS common to be divided by
0.5 or 1.5? Please also show the distribution figure of GRS in all subjects.
2) Figure 2 shows time to detection of adenomatous polyps. Which age does it
mean when subjects first underwent colonoscopy or when they subsequently
underwent colonoscopy several times and polyps were first found? The low GRS
group seems to be better survival than the other groups. However, if the X label
expresses the first time of colonoscopy screening, is there a possibility that the
lower group simply includes older people when they underwent first
colonoscopy? Background characteristics of the three groups should be listed,
and please state the authors' opinion, including the backgrounds.
3) Tables 2 indicates the association between GRS and detailed features of
adenomatous polyp. How do the authors consider that multiple polyps were not
related to GRS although a single polyp was related?
4) As for the description of Table 2 in lines 199-209, I propose that it is better to
change comparative degree or "significantly…", not "strongest".
5) It seems that the first half of "Discussion" is similar to "Result". At least, I
think that it does not need detailed information that have been explained in
"Result", such as odds ratio and P-value.
6) Please do not abbreviate SNP in abstract when it first appears. In contrast, the
abbreviations of GWAS and ADR do not need because it is described in
manuscript only once.
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 upon publication of the manuscript. 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
No
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.
I declare that I have no competing interests.
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 
do not
 publish my name
with my report. (default)
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