Review for 10.1186/s12876-016-0421-8 (2016)

Reviewer ’s report  
 
Title: Implications and Issues Related to Familial Pancreatic Cancer: A Cohort Study of 
Hospitalized Patients  
 
Version: 0 Date: 01 Dec 2015  
 
Reviewer: Claudio  Luchini  
 
Reviewer's report:  
 
REVIEWER'S COMMENT  
This is a very well written paper and the presented topic is important. The methods are 
appropriate. The results are of importance.  
I have only minor suggestions, since I consider thi s manuscript suitable for publication after 
minor revisions.  
1. Please change a little bit the title. I think that, on the basis of the results, it is better to write 
something like this:  "Implications and issues linked to Familial Pancreatic Cancer: A 
Cohort Study of Hospitalized Patients". In this way you can highlight that the incidence can 
be negligible but in the future also rare cases have to be studied in depth (personalized 
medicine, early diagnosis,…). As written, indeed, you show that the frequen cy of familial 
PDAC is small, but its importance, from the point of view of early diagnosis, is not 
negligible and patients with risk of familial cancer merit an appropriate calinical follow -up. 
 
2. In the Discussion, in my opinion it is important to analyz e briefly the role of some genes. I 
suggest this reference: ""BRCA1, BRCA2, PALB2, and CDKN2A mutations in familial 
pancreatic cancer: a PACGENE study" by Zhen DB, et al., on  Genet Med. 2015 
Jul;17(7):569 -77. 
Are the methods appropriate and well described?  
If not, please specify what is required in your comme nts 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.  
 
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 specify what aspects req uire 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 co mpeting 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 -financ ial 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 i nterests  
 
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 t he 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 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