Review for 10.1186/s12876-020-01547-x (2020)

Reviewer’s report
Title: 
Progression to invasive cancer after snare polypectomy of intracholecystic
papillary neoplasms during gallbladder stone removal by percutaneous
transhepatic choledochoscopy: A case report
Version: 
0 
Date: 
01 Oct 2020
Reviewer's report:
) Originality/ literature review: there are about 25 articles describing ICPN cases
or case series and their pre-cancerous nature. The originality of this paper could
be found in a potential description of endoscopic remotion of the polipoid lesion
(for example type cold or hot polypectomy, type of snare and so on), which is
never described as effective technique in previous existing works. I'd like you to
deepen this interest aspect. Is it an effective technique according to your
experience?
You should also write about the existing 
reports on specific imaging findings,
unfortunately 
you don't mention them (line 40). 
Natural history of ICPN lesion as general behaviour with histologic and imaging
features has already been described in other recent articles as:
a) Oba T, Sato N, Tamura T, Komeda M, Adachi Y, Matsuyama A, Hirata K. A
case of gallbladder adenocarcinoma arising in association with intracystic
papillary neoplasm (ICPN) with abundant mucin production. Clin J
Gastroenterol. 2020 Sep 19. doi: 10.1007/s12328-020-01233-1. Epub ahead of
print. PMID: 32949333 (similar case with a synchronous presence- not
metachronous as in the proposed work- between carcinoma of the gallbladder
and ICPN) 
b) Sarıtaş AG, Topal U, Ülkü A, Akçam AT, Erdoğan K, Aydın İ.
Intracholecystic Papillary-Tubular Neoplasms (ICPN) of the Gallbladder. Ann
Ital Chir. 2020 Feb 9;9:S2239253X20031072. PMID: 32039884
c) Adsay V, Jang KT, Roa JC, Dursun N, Ohike N, Bagci P, Basturk O,
Bandyopadhyay S, Cheng JD, Sarmiento JM, Escalona OT, Goodman M, Kong
SY, Terry P. Intracholecystic papillary-tubular neoplasms (ICPN) of the
gallbladder (neoplastic polyps, adenomas, and papillary neoplasms that are ≥1.0
cm): clinicopathologic and immunohistochemical analysis of 123 cases. Am J
Surg Pathol. 2012 Sep;36(9):1279-301. doi: 10.1097/PAS.0b013e318262787c.
PMID: 22895264 (This article You cited describes how long- term death can
occur even in non- invasive forms with dimnesions > 1 cm at a median time of
73.5 months, emphasizing the need for long term follow- up)
d) Saei Hamedani F, Garcia-Buitrago M. Intracholecystic Papillary-Tubular
Neoplasms (ICPN) of the Gallbladder: A Short Review of Literature. Appl
Immunohistochem Mol Morphol. 2020 Jan;28(1):57-61. doi:
10.1097/PAI.0000000000000711. PMID: 31815746 (recent review describing
the histological characteristics and prognosis associated with the various
histotypes)
e) Argon A, Barbet FY, Nart D. The Relationship Between Intracholecystic
Papillary-Tubular Neoplasms and Invasive Carcinoma of the Gallbladder. Int J
Surg Pathol. 2016 Sep;24(6):504-11. doi: 10.1177/1066896916644781. Epub
2016 Apr 27. PMID: 27122163
f) Kiruthiga KG, Kodiatte TA, Burad D, Kurian R, Raju RS, Rymbai ML,
Jagannathan AM, Vyas FL. Intracholecystic papillary-tubular neoplasms of the
gallbladder - A clinicopathological study of 36 cases. Ann Diagn Pathol. 2019
Jun;40:88-93. doi: 10.1016/j.anndiagpath.2019.04.014. Epub 2019 Apr 30.
PMID: 31077876
g) Hazarika P, Sharma MK. Intracholecystic papillary-tubular neoplasm of
gallbladder: A 5-year retrospective pathological study. Indian J Pathol Microbiol.
2018 Oct-Dec;61(4):516-519. doi: 10.4103/IJPM.IJPM_489_17. PMID:
30303140
2) There are some English Language mistakes/typos:
-Introduction, case presentation: "despite the presence..." 
should be 
"due to the
presence..." (line 18); "removed endoscopically" 
should be 
"endoscopically
removed" (riga 24); "re- visited" should be "came back to" (riga 24)
-Main text, Case presentation: "altered mentality", 
should be 
"altered mental
status" (line 20); "percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage was performed
immediately" 
should be 
"... immediately performed" (line 40); "she was strongly
adverse" (line 42); "because it was incompletely removed" 
should be 
"due to its
incomplete removal (line 55); "however the patient.." 
should be 
"unfortunately"
(line 59); "the patient re- visited" should be "came back to" (line1); 
-Discussion and conclusion: "or standardized management strategy has not been
reported" should be "have not been reported" (line 32); 
"is detected incidentally
in the abdominal image" 
should be "is incidentally detected during abdominal
imaging" (line 26); "therefore it is difficult to differentiate between them" 
should
be " it is difficult to differentiate them" 
(line 38); "ICPN found when removing
stones through PTCS and removed through endoscopic resection would not have
been completely removed" 
should be "ICPN found during gallbladder stones was
thus not completely removed through PTCS 
(lines 58-59-1)"; 
"computed
tomography findings were similar in that ICPN was indistinguishable from
gallbladder cancer" 
should be " computed tomography findings were
indistinguishable to those of a gallbladder cancer" 
(lines 6-7); "progression of
ICPN to invasive adenocarcinoma that was treated successfully" should be "that
was successfully treated" (line 21)
-Abbreviation (title of the paragraph) should be Abbreviations 
-Authors' contributions: "SH Dong has made contributions" should be "SH Dong
contributed to data acquisition" (line 30)
-Funding paragraph: "No funding was received" 
should be 
"No fundings were
received" 
3) Images are clear 
and explanatory. However: the caption of figure 3 describes
"transabdominal sonography findings" which are in figure 4 instead, while figure
4 describes immunohistochemical stain (which are probably in figure 3)
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
Yes
Declaration of competing interests
Please complete a declaration of competing interests, considering the following
questions:
1
. 
Have you in the past five years received reimbursements, fees, funding, or
salary from an organisation that may in any way gain or lose financially
from the publication of this manuscript, either now or in the future?
2
. 
Do you hold any stocks or shares in an organisation that may in any way
gain or lose financially from the publication of this manuscript, either now
or in the future?
3
. 
Do you hold or are you currently applying for any patents relating to the
content of the manuscript?
4
. 
Have you received reimbursements, fees, funding, or salary from an
organization that holds or has applied for patents relating to the content of
the manuscript?
5
. 
Do you have any other financial competing interests?
6
. 
Do you have any non-financial competing interests in relation to this
paper?
If you can answer no to all of the above, write 'I declare that I have no competing
interests' below. If your reply is yes to any, please give details below.
I declare 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?
No
Are the images in this manuscript (including electrophoretic gels and blots) free
from apparent manipulation?
No