JerMa88/BMC_Gastroenterology_Peer_Reviews huggingface dataset:
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-12-138 (2012)

Reviewer's report
Title:The role of aspirin in post-polypectomy bleeding a retrospective survey
Version: 2Date:18 June 2012
Reviewer: Dimitrios Kapetanos
Reviewer's report:
This is a retrospective study on the risk of post polypectomy bleeding in patients
receiving aspirin. It concludes, in contrast to recent guidelines, that the risk is
substantial and that we should treat these patients with caution. The major
limitation of the study is the retrospective design and we must assume that
important parameters were retrieved for all patients.
Minor Essential Revisions
1. Reference 10 is missing in the text.
2. In the methods section the third sentence from the end (patients were
excluded...) is not easily understood.
3. The severity of hemorrhage (only readmission, transfusion, surgery) should be
mentioned.
4. Reference 15 is discussed before reference 14.
Major Compulsory Revisions
1. In the introduction and discussion section reference 9 is misleading as it is
based in old data.
2. In the results section, in the polypectomy techniques, the type of current (cut,
coagulation) used should be stated. The type of polypectomy technique in
patients who bled should be stated too. Was any preventive haemostatic method
(clips, injection of adrenaline solution, endoloops etc) used?
3. In the discussion section, the risk of an event with temporary discontinuation of
aspirin (primary and secondary prevention) should be discussed.
4. The authors should also discuss the recent European guidelines and the also
recent large prospective and retrospective studies on the risk of hemorrhage
while patients were on aspirin.
5. The authors should also state how do they treat patients on aspirin and what
preventive measures they undertake in order to minimize the risk of post
polypectomy bleeding.
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-12-138 (2012)

Reviewer's report
Title:The role of aspirin in post-polypectomy bleeding a retrospective survey
Version: 4Date:11 August 2012
Reviewer: Dimitrios Kapetanos
Reviewer's report:
The authors addressed most of the previous issues. Three points remain to be
corrected so as the article could accomplish it's goal:
1. The following questions should be answered in the discussion section: What is
the risk of discontinuing aspirin for a short period in patients who are receiving it
as secondary prevention? Does the risk of post polypectomy bleeding balance
the risk of stopping aspirin?
2. I could not find reference 16 in the Pubmed. Since it is an important reference,
with guidelines different from other societies, I think that it should be corrected.
3. It is interesting that no endoscopic effort was undertaken in bleeding (on
aspirin) patients although they were hospitalized for long period (even 22 days!).
Do the authors have a comment on this?
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-12-138 (2012)

Reviewer's report
Title:The role of aspirin in post-polypectomy bleeding a retrospective survey
Version: 4Date:17 August 2012
Reviewer: Lukejohn Day
Reviewer's report:
All of my concerns and comments have been addressed. Article has significantly
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:
None
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-12-137 (2012)

Reviewer's report
Title:Polymorphisms in ERCC1, GSTs, TS and MTHFR predict clinical
outcomes of gastric cancer patients treated with platinum/5-Fu-based
chemotherapy: a systematic review
Version: 1Date:5 June 2012
Reviewer: Katja Ott
Reviewer's report:
It is a relevant metaanalysis on an important topic. Many papers on different
patient cohorts treated neoadjuvatly, palliatively were recently published. This
metaanalyis tries to find relevant polymorphisms being associated with toxicity,
reponse and/or prognosis of the patients.
Major compulsory revision
Introduction:
Please delete the epidemiology and focus on your aims of your study
Add nowadays standards in neoadjuvant, perioperative and adjuvant
chemotherapy and highlight the possible associations with the respective
polymorphisms
Explain, why those polymorphisms were chosen
Results:
Please add to your subgroup analysis, the type of treatment:
Preoperative versus adjuvant versus palliative
Would it be possible to define more predictive combinations of genotypes by this
metaanalysis for response and/or prognosis?
Discussion:
Shorten please the first part-it repeats facts of the introduction and focus on your
results in combinations with literature
Address the problem of polychemotherapy: never single agents are delivered.
It`s always a combination of 5-Fu and platinum containing combinations
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
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 have no competing interests
Katja Ott
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-12-137 (2012)

Reviewer's report
Title:Polymorphisms in ERCC1, GSTs, TS and MTHFR predict clinical
outcomes of gastric cancer patients treated with platinum/5-Fu-based
chemotherapy: a systematic review
Version: 1Date:28 August 2012
Reviewer: Serah funke
Reviewer's report:
this study did not give introduction/little explanation on inherited genetic variability
which may affect treatment outcomes.
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 interest
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-12-136 (2012)

Reviewer's report
Title:Use of health care services and pharmaceutical agents in coeliac disease:
a prospective nationwide study
Version: 2Date:14 September 2012
Reviewer: Alberto Lanzini
Reviewer's report:
The Authors have satisfactorily addressed the questions I raised in my reviewe
and have accordingly amended the text. No further comments from my side
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 interest
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-12-134 (2012)

Reviewer's report
Title:Adhesion GPCRs are widely expressed throughout the subsections of the
gastrointestinal tract
Version: 2Date:27 June 2012
Reviewer: Hsi-Hsien Lin
Reviewer's report:
The manuscript described a mRNA profiling analysis of 30 adhesion-GPCRs in
the rat gastrointestinal tract. The relative expression levels of 30
adhesion-GPCRs were analyzed by qRT-PCR analysis in the rat GI tract divided
into many different sections. The authors identified three categories of
expression patterns in the analysis: ubiquitous, widespread and restricted. The
authors concluded that the adhesion-GPCRs might play an important role in the
function of GI tract and considered them as potential drug targets.
Extended from previous studies on the expression patterns of adhesion-GPCRs
by the same group of authors, this manuscript is an attempt to look at the
detailed expression profiles of adhesion-GPCRs in the GI tract. Thus, the GI tract
was divided into many different segments. The data suggested that
adhesion-GPCR members are expressed ubiquitously, widely, or restricted in the
GI tract. The expression patterns of individual adhesion-GPCR hence implicate
the potential importance in the GI tract function.
The data presented in the manuscript are overall well-controlled and provided a
satisfactory explanation. The information might be useful for the later
physiological and pathological study of GI tract. However, caution should be
taken as the expression data are purely at the transcript levels. There are a few
minor points that need to be clarified better.
Minor Essential Revisions:
1. The primers used in the study are located in the 7TM region. However, it is
well known that many adhesion-GPCR genes undergo extensive alternative
splicing and generate multiple transcripts that include soluble isoforms. Hence,
the primers used might not cover the entire transcript populations. This should be
somehow discussed in the paper. Also, it might be a good idea to list the
expected size of the PCR product in the Table.
2. It will be beneficial to summarize the data in a Table listing the relative
expression levels of all 30 adhesion-GPCR members based on the phylogenetic
groups.
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-12-134 (2012)

Reviewer's report
Title:Adhesion GPCRs are widely expressed throughout the subsections of the
gastrointestinal tract
Version: 2Date:27 June 2012
Reviewer: martin stacey
Reviewer's report:
The paper is scientifically sound and shows expression of an interesting and
potentially druggable group of receptors within the different regions GI tract. The
paper will be of general interest to researchers in the field.
Minor Essential Revisions
Line 77 implies that GPR49, involved in colon tumours, is an adhesion-GPCR.
This is not the case and is missleading as written.
Line 177
CD97 is also expresssed by smooth muscle cells. This should be mentioned
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.
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-12-135 (2012)

Reviewer's report
Title:Development of the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory(TM) Eosinophilic
Esophagitis Module items: qualitative methods
Version: 1Date:23 July 2012
Reviewer: Hans PROF Van Rostenberghe
Reviewer's report:
This article reports the development of a very important questionnaire.
The report is very well written.
Introduction is clear and to the point.
The methods are well stated and appropriate
The results are presented accurately
Both on relevance and newsworthiness this article is scoring high
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-12-135 (2012)

Reviewer's report
Title:Development of the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory(TM) Eosinophilic
Esophagitis Module items: qualitative methods
Version: 1Date:27 July 2012
Reviewer: Steffen Husby
Reviewer's report:
General comment:
Eosinophilic Esophagitis (EoE) has during the last decades been recognized as
an emerging disease particularly, but not uniformly, in children and adolescents.
The subject of Health related Quality of Life (HRQoL) in EoE has not been
addressed previously, so the subject of the present paper is highly relevant. The
paper describes the development of a quality patient-driven questionnaire for the
assessment of the burden of EoE in children and adolescents. The framework
stems from a generic trademarked questionnaire for chronic disease in general in
pediatrics. The methodology is interesting: use of interviews to generate items
and then use of cognitive interviews to modify/improve the items.
Major compulsory revisions:
1) Focus group interviews were seemingly performed in relation to a previous
publication, but no clear reference is given. Should be given
2) The present study describes cognitive interviews in 17 children and 27
parents. A considerable proportion of the children had associated atopic disease,
which may influence the interpretation. Please substantiate this remark.
3) As noted by the authors the population contains different backgrounds, which
should be more thoroughly reported.
Minor essential revisions:
1) Material and Methods: explain the representativity of the patients with regard
to age distribution and symptom severity compared to the total clinical material at
the Clinical Center for EoE.
2) Tables: use of percentages without the actual numbers is confusing and
should be corrected.
Discretionary Revisions:
1) A drawback is the use of biased questions like “I do not like going to the
doctor”. Some questions are not completely clear: “I worry about eating food I’m
allergic to or not supposed to eat”. Otherwise, the paper is generally well-written.
2) The interviews elucidated problems and concerns that had not been previously
adressed, but they include a paucity of data. Inclusion of data from the following
multicenter evaluation would be welcomed.
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-12-135 (2012)

Reviewer's report
Title:Development of the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory(TM) Eosinophilic
Esophagitis Module items: qualitative methods
Version: 2Date:19 September 2012
Reviewer: Steffen Husby
Reviewer's report:
I can accept the revisions made by the authors.
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-12-131 (2012)

Reviewer's report
Title:A prospective longitudinal cohort study: Evolution of GERD Symptoms
during the course of pregnancy.
Version: 1Date:9 July 2012
Reviewer: Fabio Pace
Reviewer's report:
THE PAPER IS COMPREHENSIVE AND RELEVANT AND AUTHORS SHOULD
BE GRATULATED. MY ONLY CONCERNS REFERS TO THE THERAPY DATA.
I ONLY RECEIVED TABLE 1 AND 4.
IN ANY CASE, THE THERAPEUTIC CHOICE OF PREGNANT WOMEN
SHOULD BE PRESENTED WITH MORE DETAILS AND IN THE DISCUSSION
THE ISSUE RELATED TO CONCERNS OR RISK FOR MALFORAMTIVE
DEFECTS MUST BE REPHRASED FOR RECENT REVIEWS HAVE SHOWN
THAT ACTUALLY THERE ARE NON RISKS AT ALL (ONE OF SUCH REVIEW
IS QUOTED BY AUTHORS
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-12-131 (2012)

Reviewer's report
Title:A prospective longitudinal cohort study: Evolution of GERD Symptoms
during the course of pregnancy.
Version: 1Date:16 July 2012
Reviewer: Ram Dickman
Reviewer's report:
Nicely written study about the prevalence of GERD in pregnant women as
compared with matched group of non-pregnant women. The novelty of this study,
as the authors said "is the methodology employed for the assessment of
symptoms". It is the largest longitudinal study on GERD symptoms in pregnant
women. It is interesting to note that none of the pregnant women used a PPI
which is known to be safe during pregnancy. It was interesting to know what was
the prevalence of complication that were related to GERD, rate of admissions
due to severe GERD related symptoms, prevalence of esophagitis and use of
other remedies such as Gaviscon.
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-12-131 (2012)

Reviewer's report
Title:A prospective longitudinal cohort study: Evolution of GERD Symptoms
during the course of pregnancy.
Version: 2Date:22 August 2012
Reviewer: Fabio Pace
Reviewer's report:
I found the paper now 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.
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-12-132 (2012)

Reviewer's report
Title:Association between oral 5-ASA adherence and health care utilization and
costs among patients with ulcerative colitis
Version: 3Date:3 July 2012
Reviewer: Brian Bressler
Reviewer's report:
Major Compulsory Revisions
Needing only 1 claim with an ICD-9 code for UC to be included in the cohort
seems to be probem considering how many patients were excluded for not
having been prescribed 5-ASA. This suggests that the criteria may not be
specific enough. A sensitivity analysis using more claims prior to the index date
would strengthen the conclusions based on the current analysis.
The authors stated a possible problem with the analysis maybe patients going off
5-ASA agents once prednisone is prescribed. A sensitivity analysis excluding
patients who were ‘nonadherent’ the first year after the use of prednisone would
help address this concern.
Discretionary Revisions
Adherence rates for the different type of 5-ASA products would be interesting to
report.
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: Yes, and I have assessed the statistics in my report.
Declaration of competing interests:
I have received honorariums from Shire for advisory board participation and
speaking engagements
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-12-132 (2012)

Reviewer's report
Title:Association between oral 5-ASA adherence and health care utilization and
costs among active patients with ulcerative colitis
Version: 5Date:22 August 2012
Reviewer: Brian Bressler
Reviewer's report:
all issues adequately addressed
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: Yes, and I have assessed the statistics in my report.
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-12-132 (2012)

Reviewer's report
Title:Association between oral 5-ASA adherence and health care utilization and
costs among active patients with ulcerative colitis
Version: 5Date:4 September 2012
Reviewer: Christina Ha
Reviewer's report:
The revisions supplied are acceptable - however, some of the more numerical
data in the red highlighted section may be more appropriate in the results section
rather than the discussion.
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 I have no competing interests.
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-12-133 (2012)

Reviewer's report
Title:Assessment of Helicobacter pylori eradication in patients on NSAID
treatment
Version: 2Date:28 August 2012
Reviewer: Atsushi Takagi
Reviewer's report:
Authors reported a post-hoc analysis of a randomized, double blind, placebo
controlled H. pylori eradication trial in patients with NSAID usage, and concluded
that histological examination provided the best sensitivity and specificity for
evaluating success of H. pylori eradication and a percentage change of H .pylori
IgG-antibody titer had better sensitivity and specificity than an absolute titer
change.
This report includes important issues, but there are some problems to be
dissolved.
This clinical trial was studied between 2000 and 2002. Currently, the
determination of eradication by the urea breath test or H. pylori stool antigen test
are recommended (Gut 2012;61:646-664 ). As authors refer, the PPI usage may
result in false negative result. However, the comparison of histology with UBT
and the stool test is necessary, if authors conclude histology is superior methods
to diagnose eradication of H. pylori infection. Histology leads controversial results
(Gut 2012;61:646-664).
A percent change of H. pylori IgG-antibody titer seerm to be not sensitive or
specific. EIA may be recommended in patients treated with PPI.
minor point
This study is a post-hoc analysis, however, treatment regimens must be
described in Methods section.
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Acceptable
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-12-133 (2012)

Reviewer's report
Title:Assessment of Helicobacter pylori eradication in patients on NSAID
treatment
Version: 2Date:28 August 2012
Reviewer: Guoxin Zhang
Reviewer's report:
The manuscript entitled “Assessment of Helicobacter pylori eradication in
patients on NSAID treatment” by HE Vonkeman et al presents a post-hoc
investigation into H. pylori IgG-antibody titer changes following H. pylori
eradication therapy in NSAID users. They concluded that in NSAID using
patients, following H. pylori eradication therapy or placebo, histological
examination of gastric mucosal tissue biopsies provided the best sensitivity and
specificity ratios for evaluating success of H. pylori eradication therapy, and a
percentual H. pylori IgG-antibody titer change has better sensitivity and
specificity than an absolute titer change or a predefined H. pylori IgGantibody
titer cut-off point for evaluating success of H. pylori eradication therapy. The
study is globally well performed, however, several points are incomplete.
- Major Compulsory Revisions
1. The authors found that histological examination provided the best sensitivity
and specificity ratios for evaluating success of H. pylori eradication therapy in
NSAID using patients. It should be discussed in the section of discussion.
2. Can authors consider the sensitivity and specificity of different tests of H. pylori
in NSAID-naïve patients in comparison with NSAID users in sub-analysis?
3. PPI usage may obtain false negative results, however, we didn’t see if there
was PPI usage in two groups of H. pylori eradication therapy and placebo.
4. In discussion section, NSAID using did not seem to influence H. pylori
eradication rates or serological testing for H. pylori, but they only selected
patients with NSAID using. It would be better if there are results from the group of
NSAID using and the group of non- NSAID using.
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-12-130 (2012)

Reviewer's report
Title:Stoical patients are more likely to have colorectal cancer
Version: 2Date:25 July 2012
Reviewer: Magdalena Esteva
Reviewer's report:
1. I have been reviewing author responses and I consider that most of the issues
have been addressed.
1. Major compulsory revisions
2. Minor essential Revisions
Again I suggest that additional tables 5,6 and 7 be included in the manuscript
and change table 2 by additional table 4 as it is more informative for readers,
gives a more comprehensive scope.
In paragraph 2 of the introduction section, there is a word repeated in line 5 'that'
References: Change complete by Abbreviated name of journals.
Level of interest: An article of limited interest
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: Yes, and I have assessed the statistics in my report.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare I have no competing interests
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-12-130 (2012)

Reviewer's report
Title:Stoical patients are more likely to have colorectal cancer
Version: 2Date:25 July 2012
Reviewer: Alice Simon
Reviewer's report:
The authors have carried out additional work on this paper and successfully
addressed the points raised in my previous review.
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-12-130 (2012)

Reviewer's report
Title:Patients who take their symptoms less seriously are more likely to have
colorectal cancer
Version: 3Date:4 September 2012
Reviewer: Magdalena Esteva
Reviewer's report:
Dear editor,
Authors adressed all issues requested and In my opinion, the manuscript is
ready to be published,
Your sincerely,
Level of interest: An article of limited interest
Quality of written English: Acceptable
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-12-129 (2012)

Reviewer's report
Title:Chronic calcium pyrophosphate crystal inflammatory arthritis induced by
extreme hypomagnesemia in short bowel syndrome
Version: 1Date:21 May 2012
Reviewer: Claire Louise Donohoe
Reviewer's report:
1. General comments: This is a well written and interesting case report. The
authors note that although a rare complication of SBS, which is in itself a rare
condition, there have been other reports of CPPD associated with
hypomagnesaemia. The value of this report is that it uses the case reported to
illustrate the principles of investigation and treatment of malabsorption in the
setting of SBS. The report explores the multi-factorial aetiology of
hypomagnesaemia within the setting of SBS; illustrates in detail the thorough
multi-disciplinary assessment of hypomagnesaemia and discusses the multiple
interventions required in order to address the arthralgia with which the patient
presented.
2. Minor essential revisions
Page 2, Paragraph 4 Abstract: change colchicum to colchicines
Page 3, Paragraph 1 Abstract: change rareness to rarity
Page 4, Paragraph 2: Define BMI
Page 4, Paragraph 3: Change those to these
Page 4, Paragraph 3: Change discomforts to discomfort
Page 5, paragraph 2: First sentence does not make grammatical sense, please
re-phrase.
Page 5, paragraph 2: change vertebras to vertebrae.
Page 5, paragraph 3: Delete seeing
Page 6, paragraph 1: Delete a
Page 7, paragraph 1: Change columns to principles
Page 7, paragraph 1: Change “Due to non-steroidal drug intolerance this
group...” to “Due to the non-steroidal drug intolerance diagnosed, this group...”
Page 8, paragraph 1: Change “...while applying above listed..” to “...while
applying the above listed..”
Page 8, paragraph 2: Change “After one year treatment the...” to “After one year
of treatment the...”
Page 8, paragraph 2: Change month to months
3. Discretionary revisions –
A schematic diagram illustrating the pathophysiology of hypomagnesaemia in
SBS as detailed in the discussion would be a valuable addition to the paper.
Page 4, paragraph 3: Beware subjective attribution within this descriptive
paragraph – a description of the patient’s symptoms would be more informative
rather than the statement “slipped into depression and chronic fatigue
syndrome”. Did the patient meet DSM criteria for depression? Was he
undergoing treatment for depression? How was the reported chronic fatigue
syndrome defined? These questions can be avoided by describing the patient’s
symptoms.
Page 8, paragraph 2: Is it common psychiatric practice to use anti-depressants in
an on-demand schedule?
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-12-129 (2012)

Reviewer's report
Title:Chronic calcium pyrophosphate crystal inflammatory arthritis induced by
extreme hypomagnesemia in short bowel syndrome
Version: 1Date:9 July 2012
Reviewer: Jeremy Nightingale
Reviewer's report:
This interesting case report is of a patient who has hypomagnesaemia secondary
to malabsorption due to a short bowel (jejuno-colic anastomosis due to trauma)
and various food intolerances, and who also has joint pains due to calcium
pyrophosphate. It is proposed that the hypomagnesaemia causes the joint
problems because treatment of hypomagnesaemia (in addition to low vitamins D
&,B12, calcium and zinc) allowed the oral steroid dose to be reduced as
symptoms improved.
Minor points
P3 metabolic problems occur if less than 200 cm and no colon. Not 300-350 cm
as stated.
P4 what is gonarthritis?
P4 Underweight - what was BMI at this time?
P5 What is adynamia?
P5 The magnesium resorption test is interesting (P5). Please specify how it is
done.
P6 I am surprised breath hydrogen was not raised usually it is very high at rest in
jejunum-colon patients so the test cannot be performed.
P6 As gut length is 185 cm anastomosed to half the colon, I am very surprised by
the hypomagnesaemia. The authors justify it with the additional food
intolerances.
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.
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-12-128 (2012)

Reviewer's report
Title:Role of tight junction proteins in gastroesophageal reflux disease
Version: 1Date:6 July 2012
Reviewer: norimasa yoshida
Reviewer's report:
This paper demonstrates implication of tight junction in GERD.
Which differences are there in the expression of tight junction molecules between
NERD and ERD?
Do these differences have any effect on the pathogenesis of NERD and ERD?
Authors should discuss about these questions.
Which is biopsy sample in Figure 2 taken from, NERD or ERD?
Description in Figure 2 legend(ERD) and Figure 2(NERD) are different.
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-12-127 (2012)

Reviewer's report
Title:Phase I Study of Miriplatin combined with Transarterial Chemotherapy
using CDDP powder in Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma
Version: 1Date:11 June 2012
Reviewer: Joerg F. Schlaak
Reviewer's report:
Kamimura and coworkers have conducted a phase I dose-escalating study using
transarterial chemotherapy that utilized CDDP powder (DDP-H) in combination
with miriplatin for the treatment of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).
In their cohort of 9 patients no dose-limiting toxicity was observed. A partial
response was obtained in 1 patient while four showed stable disease.
Several major points need to be addressed:
In the abstract a disease control rate of 40% is reported while in table 3 this
number ranged between 50% and 66%. This should be clarified.
In the patients selection criteria it is stated that “no other therapeutic treatment
was found to be effective” while the minimal interval to the previous treatment
was only 4 weeks. Apparently, 8 out of 9 patients had received CDDP therapy
before where a 4-week interval is certainly too short to convincingly assess
disease progression. Thus, the authors should state the interval to the previous
therapy for each patient and clarify the individual treatment history.
The introduction is far too lengthy and should be more focused on the literature
that is available on the subject.
In figure 2 tumor marker levels are shown for each dosing group. It would be
more informative, however, if individual levels were shown possibly arranged
according to radiological response.
The manuscript needs the thorough attention of a native speaker.
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-12-127 (2012)

Reviewer's report
Title:Phase I Study of Miriplatin combined with Transarterial Chemotherapy
using CDDP powder in Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma
Version: 1Date:17 June 2012
Reviewer: Arndt Vogel
Reviewer's report:
Kamimura performed a phase 1 study to determine the maximum tolerated dose
and dose-limiting toxicity for the combination of transarterial oily
chemoembolization and transarterial chemotherapy using miriplatin and cisplatin
in patients with advanced HCC. Patients first received a transarterial
chemotherapy with increasing doses of cisplatin through the hepatic artery
followed by a transarterial oily chemoembolization with miriplatin. Nine patients
were enrolled and no DLT was observed with any dose of cisplatin and miriplatin
suggesting that this combination can be safely administered. In some patients,
which all have received previous therapies, a disease stabilization was possible.
Overall, the results are clearly presented and the manuscript is well written.
Previous studies from Japan have already compared the efficacy of miriplatin
with cisplatin and observed a comparable short-term efficacy, but slightly better
tolerability for miriplatin. The study presented here indicates that both drugs can
also be safely administered together, which might lead to a better tumor control.
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-12-126 (2012)

Reviewer's report
Title:Patients' perspectives of living with a percutaneous endoscopic
gastrostomy (PEG)
Version: 1Date:27 May 2012
Reviewer: Simon N Rogers
Reviewer's report:
There is a paucity of patient reported outcomes of gastrostomy feeding so this is
a potentially exciting addition to the literature.
The authors elude to an earlier paper – it is assumed that the patient reported
outcome data in this report was collected as part of the RCT but not presented in
the earlier paper, assumingly because the PROM was a secondary endpoint.
Blomberg J, Lagergren P, Martin L, Mattsson F, Lagergren J: Novel approach to
antibiotic prophylaxis in percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG):
randomised controlled trial. BMJ 2010, 341:c3115. doi: 3110.1136/bmj.c3115.
The patients completed a questionnaire at 2 months. It is not clear why this time
point was chosen. There was follow up to 6 months and perhaps both time points
could have been used.
A non-validated study specific PROM was used in this study. This is fine as there
are only a few questionnaires available e.g reference 12 but this was published in
2007 and this study started in 2005. The disappointment is that there is no other
anchors for this measure e.g swallowing questionnaires as part of HRQOL
outcomes used in H&N, also it would have been useful to include a general
HRQOL measure such as EQ-5d to describe the cohort and perhaps look for
difference in PEG responses by the items.
The PEG questions used in this study are very simple and are suitable for postal
survey, telephone survey, not necessary clinic review. With clinic review extra
data on nutrition and frequency of use would add to the interpretation of the
study.
Was there baseline PROM and if so what was this?
The details on the insertion of the PEG is not really relevant to this paper.
Interesting to combine the 4 point Likert scale to yes / no dichotomized response
for statistical analysis. Not sure about this. A table giving the data is often quite
useful to the reader and could be achieved as only 10 questions are used. It is
not clear why all 16 questions are not reported.
The reason for PEG needs thought as 51 patients died within 2 months seems
high, whilst 12 patients had already had it removed. It is not clear why 55 patients
were excluded.
The paper highlights the patient reported impact of PEG feeding but there seems
to be no balance with trade off if the PEG was not placed. The patients were not
asked about how necessary they felt the PEG was, or if they regretted having the
PEG.
As a prospective study it is a pity that there is not data on how much the PEG
was needed for feeding and nutritional aspects of the PEG – how much feed by
PEG and how much orally.
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 that I have no competing interests'
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-12-126 (2012)

Reviewer's report
Title:Patients' perspectives of living with a percutaneous endoscopic
gastrostomy (PEG)
Version: 1Date:28 June 2012
Reviewer: Rupert Leong
Reviewer's report:
This study uniquely offers an insight as to the biopsychosocial model of PEG
acceptance in over 100 subjects. The study was original and manuscript was of a
good length and well-written. The overall conclusion was that PEGs are
perceived negatively in a large proportion of subjects.
Major points:
This was a descriptive studies that identified differences in PEG recipients. Some
findings deserve more discussion - eg women felt more limited in daily activity -
might be gender role differences that requires controls with the same primary
diseases or normal controls for this to make sense.
Study should include some positive aspects including the possibility of PEG
removal, good outcomes and quote Paramsothy S et al J Gastro Hepatol 2009.
The conclusion should take into account that without PEG they would be
nutritionally deprived or dead!
Minor points:
Abstract: 70% of what? Response rate?
Background: isn't it an advantage to take treatment from inpatient to home for
quality of life of patients and health care utilization & cost?
Discussion: adequately discusses bias. Should also mention that a baseline pre-
and post- PEG insertion study should be designed to paint the right light as to the
PEG experience.
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:
Nil
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-12-126 (2012)

Reviewer's report
Title:Patients' perspectives of living with a percutaneous endoscopic
gastrostomy (PEG)
Version: 1Date:29 June 2012
Reviewer: David Sanders
Reviewer's report:
This is an important article from a group who have published many key papers in
this field.
The authors uniquely describe patient’s perspectives. Although this has been
done previously using quality of life tools overall there is a significant paucity in
the literature. The investigators have made some important novel observations.
I have a few points:
1. I think the emphasis in both the abstract conclusion and conclusion at the end
of the paper is a little downbeat! Ultimately 73% of patients said they were
satisfied with their Peg (Table 2). I think this should be reflected in both abstract
conclusion and conclusion of paper
2. Methodology: I think it would be valuable to attribute numbers to the different
exclusion groups. How many did not speak Swedish etc
3. The questionnaire that was used – has it been used elsewhere? Is it
validated? Did they pilot the questionnaire? I think this adds important
information for the reader particularly if other investigators wish to
validate/support their observations internationally
4. Could the authors discuss a little some of Brotherton’s work on patients
negative PEG experiences – this ties in with the investigators novel work
5. The discussion on PEG clinic should also involve other options. I have
enclosed a community paper not because it is from our group but because it is
both contemporaneous and relevant to their discussion. I hope this is helpful.
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: Yes, and I have assessed the statistics in my report.
Declaration of competing interests:
nothing to declare
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-12-126 (2012)

Reviewer's report
Title:Patients' perspectives of living with a percutaneous endoscopic
gastrostomy (PEG)
Version: 2Date:26 August 2012
Reviewer: Simon N Rogers
Reviewer's report:
There is clarity and justification from the authors to the points raised. They have
been adequately addressed.
Level of interest: An article of outstanding merit and interest in its field
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-12-125 (2012)

Reviewer's report
Title:A gluten-free diet effectively reduces symptoms and health care
consumption in a Swedish celiac disease population
Version: 2Date:2 February 2012
Reviewer: joseph murray
Reviewer's report:
This is an interesting paper that, using survey methods, describes the
self-reported benefit of a gluten-free diet. It documents patients’ reports of a
decreased healthcare utilization as well as personal costs in terms of days lost.
Minor Comments:
1. Does the duration of diagnosis of celiac disease affect the apparent response?
If there is no effect of the duration, then it is unlikely that recall bias would have a
major impact on the patient’s perception of improvement.
2. Prior economic studies—the authors should include a reference to the health
economic study carried out by Green PHR et al (J Insurance Medicine 2008).
3. How did the authors handle the actual diagnostic tests for celiac disease?
Were these included or were these likely to have been included in the
assessment of the year prior to diagnosis, initiation of treatment, or not?
4. Is there any available data to compare with natural history of patients without
celiac disease in terms of health care utilization?
5. The introduction, particularly the 3rd paragraph, could be shorted as it does
not appear to be entirely relevant to the topic at hand.
6. The issue of the occurrence of second autoimmune diseases also probably
needs to be carefully evaluated to address the issue of whether a type 2 error
could have occurred due to lack of power.
7. How was celiac disease verified? For example, is membership in the Celiac
Society of Sweden contingent upon diagnosis by biopsy?
8. Is it likely that patients with the most severe outcome may have died after
diagnosis? How many questionnaires were returned because of death of the
individuals?
9. What immune-mediated diseases in the population were used to ascertain
how these frequencies compare?
10. The frequency of GI symptoms reported in the pre-treatment and in the
current time frame examines the difference in frequency as the overall group.
What was the new occurrence of symptoms in subjects who did not report it in
the pre-treatment phase? For example, one study by Murray et al (Am J Clin
Nutr, 2004) documented a new onset of symptoms. It may be helpful to report the
new onset of symptoms in patients previously lacking those symptoms.
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-12-125 (2012)

Reviewer's report
Title:A gluten-free diet effectively reduces symptoms and health care
consumption in a Swedish celiac disease population
Version: 2Date:18 February 2012
Reviewer: Donald Duerksen
Reviewer's report:
Major Points
1.The AIM of the study is to determine the effect of a gluten free diet on various
factors including symptoms, associated autoimmune diseases and health care
consumption. In this paper, there is no data on the degree of adherence with a
gluten free diet. There is an assumption that all of the patients completing the
questionnaire are adhering to a gluten free diet. In order to answer the aim of the
study, data should be included on the self-reported adherence as this is likely the
only data that is available. A table should be included that stratifies patients
based on degree of adherence to a gluten free diet to determine if there is any
treatment association with the different variables considered in this study. If this
data is not available, at the very least, a portion of the discussion should be
devoted to this as a limitation.
2. What was the mean and median duration of time on a GFD for the
respondents? This would have some influence on the magnitude of the recall
bias of the study. Factors such as recalling health care utilization would be
particularly affected by time since diagnosis. A table listing the demographics of
this study group should be included.
Minor Points
1. Background
In the first sentence celiac disease is defined as “intolerance”. This is confusing
given recent literature on ‘gluten intolerance’, and its distinction from celiac
disease. Would avoid this terminology and define celiac disease in other ways.
2. Methods
‘rheumatic disease’ was asked about in the questionnaire. This implies a
multitude of possible syndromes including RA, SLE, scleroderma etc. Do the
individuals in the questionnaire know what rheumatic diseases are? Were they
asked about all of these individually? Which diseases were asked about?
3. Results Page 6 – Health case consumption 2nd last line - no should be not
4. Discussion. Worth commenting in the discussion on the finding that although
‘all symptoms’ except joint symptoms improved post diagnosis compared with
pre diagnosis, in some cases, a significant minority (20% for fatigue and
flatulence) still had symptoms of major severity. How does this compare to other
studies in the literature?
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-12-125 (2012)

Reviewer's report
Title:A gluten-free diet effectively reduces symptoms and health care
consumption in a Swedish celiac disease population
Version: 3Date:3 July 2012
Reviewer: Donald Duerksen
Reviewer's report:
The authors have made substantial revisions to the original manuscript and have
greatly improved the manuscript.
Ninor Essential Revision
The authors include data regarding the onset of new symptoms in asymptomatic
patients. (Reply #10 Reviewer 1) While the authors feel that this does not add
valuble information to the paper, this information is useful and I would
recommend including it in the paper.
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:
No competing interests