JerMa88/BMC_Gastroenterology_Peer_Reviews huggingface dataset:
Review for 10.1186/s12876-021-02074-z (2022)

Title: Indicators of suboptimal response to anti-tumor necrosis factor therapy in patients from
China with inflammatory bowel disease: Results from the EXPLORE study
Version: 8 Date: 22 Aug 2021
Reviewer's report:
Many thanks for allowing me to review once more the revised manuscript titled " Indicators
of suboptimal response to anti-tumor necrosis factor therapy in patients from China with
inflammatory bowel disease: Results from the EXPLORE study". I still believe that while the
authors did improve the manuscript considerably, 2 points raised by me initially, need attention.
- A table comparing epidemiological and clinical factors between patients without suboptimal
response and those with sub-optimal response,
While the authors rightfully claim that such comparisons were made, the data proper were not
presented in the paper. For the sake of presentating transparent and complete set of the data
observed, this table is still required.
- Adding a separate analyses for primary non-responders and SLOR
The author righfully point that power issues limit this anlysis. Nevetheless, the authors chose
to present these comparison in the figures, Perhaps such secondary analysis could be added to
the supplementary material?
All the other points have be adequately adressed. I believe that upon revision of this version
according to the points raised above the manuscript may be acepted.
Thank you again for allowing me to review this revised manuscript.
Kind regards,
Review for 10.1186/s12876-022-02125-z (2022)

Title: Factors affecting the use of herbal products in patients with Irritable Bowel Syndrome
and their results; case-control study
Version: 3 Date: 25 Apr 2021
Reviewer's report:
This is an interesting study - although would be helpful to see this in a multi-center study, which
included patients being seen in rural clinic or village doctor.  The point of bias that could be
caused by select marketing in certain areas (as mentioned in your Discussion) could actually be
taking effect in this small pool of subjects from one hospital's outpatient clinic. Overall, it is
very thought provoking and I enjoyed reading it.
There are several typographical errors which I have pointed out in my review.  They should be
easy enough to fix so that the reader can fully understand your meaning.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-022-02125-z (2022)

Title: Factors affecting the use of herbal products in patients with Irritable Bowel Syndrome
and their results; case-control study
Version: 5 Date: 06 Jun 2021
Reviewer's report:
Overall this second version is much easier to read than the first.  I can see time as taken to clarify
much in the language.  None of my initial concerns were addressed, I assume the senior editors
did not find them relevant.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-022-02125-z (2022)

Title: Factors affecting the use of herbal products in patients with Irritable Bowel Syndrome
and their results; case-control study
Version: 5 Date: 11 Jun 2021
Reviewer:  Ernst Fredericks
Reviewer's report:
There is a significant improvement on the original manuscript. Language remains a thorny issue
and professional language editing is recommended before publication. All points/queries raised
in the first round have been adequately addressed. Before publication, tables 5, 6 and 7 requires
attention. It is not clear how the % in these tables were calculated and it will be useful to give
n (total patient number) at top of table. Table 7 does not add any valuable information (no
statistically significant result) and could be left out altogether.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-022-02119-x (2022)

Title: Inflammatory cloacogenic polyps in children: diagnostic yield of rectal retroflexion during
colonoscopy
Version: 2 Date: 09 Dec 2021
Reviewer's report:
This is an interesting and well-written manuscript.
The main limitation of the study is its retrospective design but due to the high number of patients
I believe that the manuscript is worthy of publication. I suggest to add in the discussion section
the potential role of digital rectal examination and fecal calprotectine in the evaluation of this
kind of patients. Add in the reference section the recent manuscript published on this topic
(Faecal calprotectin and ultrasonography as non-invasive screening tools for detecting colorectal
polyps in children with sporadic rectal bleeding: a prospective study. Di Nardo G, et al. Ital J
Pediatr.2020 May 20;46:66).
Review for 10.1186/s12876-022-02119-x (2022)

Title: Inflammatory cloacogenic polyps in children: diagnostic yield of rectal retroflexion during
colonoscopy
Version: 2 Date: 12 Dec 2021
Reviewer's report:
Authors are to be  commended for putting together a concise and well-written manuscript.
However, there is a fundamental obstacle that this manuscript fails to overcome, namely the total
lack of novelty. Performance of rectal retroflexion maneuver during colonoscopy and especially
in cases of hematochezia is of paramount importance and as such has been already integrated in
everyday clinical practice, worldwide. Under this prism,  this study fails to fulfill its principal
aim and  cannot be recommended for publication.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-022-02113-3 (2022)

Title: Effect of disease duration on the association between C-reactive protein-albumin ratio
and endoscopic activity in ulcerative colitis
Version: 1 Date: 14 Nov 2021
Reviewer's report:
The authors investigated whether CAR could predict mucosal healing and endoscopic active
disease. Because measuring CRP and serum albumin is simple and relatively non-invasive, the
present manuscript might be useful for the clinicians to predict moderate to severe endoscopic
severity only using serum biomarkers. However, there are some concerns to solve.
CRP level is not usually elevated in patients with moderate severity in the clinical setting. If so,
CAR may be useful to distinct endoscopic severe cases from others. Maybe, it can be distinct
between MES of 3 and MES of 2 or MES 1-2 using CAR. This analysis is more useful than
the analysis of the present study in determining the indications and treatment strategies for
emergency endoscopy.
Also, the extent of disease may be associated with CRP and/or albumin in patients with moderate
to severe severity. However, the authors did not mention this content in the present manuscript.
The authors should present median (or mean) CAR in patients with each MES and should
compare the differences among MES 0, 1,2, or 3.
Why did the authors divide into 3 categories about CAR? How was the cut-off value determined?
Also, what is the reason for deciding 7 years a cut-off value?
Review for 10.1186/s12876-022-02113-3 (2022)

Title: Effect of disease duration on the association between C-reactive protein-albumin ratio
and endoscopic activity in ulcerative colitis
Version: 1 Date: 14 Nov 2021
Reviewer's report:
This article is one of the few studies to examine the relationship between C-reactive protein
(CRP)-albumin(Alb) ratio (CAR) and disease activity in Japanese patients with inflammatory
bowel disease (IBD). It is very interesting to compare CAR and activity of Ulcerative colitis(UC)
in more than 270 patients and show that CAR may be useful as a serum marker of disease activity
in patients with longer duration of UC.
In order to improve the paper, I suggest that the following points be added.
1) The authors define clinical remission as no rectal bleeding and no more than three bowel
movements.  You should also include a clinical score, such as the Clinical activity index.
2) It would be better to show the mean values of CRP and Alb in each CAR group, because we
would like to know the factors behind the changes in CAR.
Minor
1) In the legend of Table 1, the notation of CAR should be changed from "C-protein to albumin
ratio" to "C-reactive protein to albumin ratio".
Review for 10.1186/s12876-022-02113-3 (2022)

Title: Effect of disease duration on the association between C-reactive protein-albumin ratio
and endoscopic activity in ulcerative colitis
Version: 2 Date: 19 Dec 2021
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for sending the revised manuscript. Most of my concerns have been settled, but the
authors should mention that CPA could not distinct MES of 3 and 2 in the revised manuscript.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-022-02114-2 (2022)

Title: The impact of face shields on the quality of gastrointestinal endoscopy during the
COVID-19 pandemic
Version: 2 Date: 12 Nov 2021
Reviewer:  Renato Pietroletti
Reviewer's report:
Dear Author, the article submitted  is interesting and the investigation is well conducted  but is
almost identical to a recently published paperalso coming from South Korea: The Influence of
Face Shields on the Quality of Colonoscopy in the Era of the COVID-19 Pandemic
Jin Wook Lee1 et al , Gut Liver 2021 Aug 25. doi: 10.5009/gnl210063. Online ahead of print .
You may understand that the  suspect of plagiarism is justify ied. Therefore it cannot be published
in the present form.
However there are several way to improve your work and differentiate to the already published
material. I may suggest the following:
1- Please cite and comment the above mentioned article
2- Please cite and comment the paper by  Shapiro M, Gastrointest endosc 1994; 40(4): 477-80
3- Please cite and comment the paper by  Ofori E, Ann gastroenterol 2018; 31(4):448-455
4-  Page 10 line 192 please add literature data on risk of  covid-19 trasmission  in upper GI
endoscopy
5- to improve and differentiate you paper from the work of your collegues,  you may add data
concerning  influence of faceshields in upper GI endoscopy  and/or during operative endoscopy
(polipectomy, ERCP)
Review for 10.1186/s12876-022-02114-2 (2022)

Title: The impact of face shields on the quality of gastrointestinal endoscopy during the
COVID-19 pandemic
Version: 2 Date: 05 Dec 2021
Reviewer:  Ahmad Hormati
Reviewer's report:
It is an interesting article at the field of COVID-19 management. It would better the author
concentrate some data with referring to the article {Preventive strategies used by GI physicians
during the COVID-19 pandemic, doi: 10.1016/j.nmni.2020.100676"
I hope more success and ending of this pandemic.
Best Regards
Review for 10.1186/s12876-022-02108-0 (2022)

Title: Diagnostic efficacy of FibroScan for liver inflammation in patients with chronic hepatitis
B --- a single-center study with 1,185 liver biopsies as controls
Version: 3 Date: 19 Nov 2021
Reviewer:  Pathik Parikh
Reviewer's report:
The authors have done a commendable job in comparing more than 1000 biopsies from CHB
patients to Fibroscan values. However, it would be worthwhile if authors can provide following
clarity
1. They  found that Inflammationa nd fibrosis correlate. How strong is the correlation, if they
can represent it via a coeeficient of correlation.
2. Since LSM is not specific for inflammation, the rise in LSM values with grades of
inflammation they found, could it be explained just by increase in simultaneous fibrosis
(inflammation and fibrosis correlates as per authors).
3. Could they show that within the same fibrosis stage, different grades of inflammation will
have significant rise in LSM values ?  the current calculations have fibrosis as major confounding
factor.
4. Out of 184 patients with S4 fibrosis - cirrhosis, 183 had G3 or G4 inflammation, which
translates that all patients even after development of cirrhosis, the inflammation remains quite
active, infact higher than non cirrhotic stage. Could authors explain why?
5. Grading of inflammation will have interobserver variability. Did the 2 pathologist saw all
biopsies? what was interobserver variability in these two observers?
6. What could be the reason of under reporting of inflammation when less portal areas (PAs)
were present in liver biopsy? As the size of liver biopsy adequate for ideal characterisation has
been debated, the stark difference that the authors found is quite alarming.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-022-02108-0 (2022)

Title: Diagnostic efficacy of FibroScan for liver inflammation in patients with chronic hepatitis
B --- a single-center study with 1,185 liver biopsies as controls
Version: 6 Date: 18 Jan 2022
Reviewer:  Pathik Parikh
Reviewer's report:
Thank You for answering all queries. Wonderful effort
Review for 10.1186/s12876-022-02108-0 (2022)

Title: Diagnostic efficacy of FibroScan for liver inflammation in patients with chronic hepatitis
B --- a single-center study with 1,185 liver biopsies as controls
Version: 6 Date: 18 Jan 2022
Reviewer's report:
After minor improvement in language, the article is suitable for publication.
The no of biopsies is huge  and  finding that inflammation correlated with fibroscan reading is
an important observation for decision making in hepatitis B.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-022-02106-2 (2022)

Title: 1L NER1006 can improve rates of adequate and high-quality bowel cleansing in the right
colon: a post hoc analysis of two randomised clinical trials
Version: 0 Date: 09 Oct 2021
Reviewer's report:
To the Editor
Thank you for giving me the opportunity to review the manuscript by Manning et al. entitled:
“1L NER1006 reproducibly exceeded the strict minimum standard of 90% adequate cleansing
success in the right colon and all other segments across two randomised clinical trials”. Authors
are to be commended for putting together a concise and well-written manuscript on a very
interesting, yet underrated topic. Despite the inherent study limitations associated to the fact
that this is a post-hoc analysis, all results are extremely useful since they replicate real world
situation. Below you may find my comments:
1. The “Background” section is too long and contains many redundant information; thus, I would
suggest to remove them mainly focusing on the objectives of this study
2. Page 7, Assessments section. Please pay attention that the 90% ESGE minimum target for
adequate bowel preparation refers to the entire large bowel and not in one segment i.e. right
colon. Therefore, comparing the absolute right colon adequate-level cleansing success rate
(segmental) versus the ESGE 90% minimum target (whole) can be rather confusing. I would
like the comments of authors on this issue and would suggest to amend appropriately, especially
since this is the primary endpoint.
3. Page 7, Assessments section, lines 145-147: I query whether this post-hoc analysis was
indeed powered enough to address all these distinct issues. Moreover, providing results for
several secondary endpoints that may be also lacking significance for everyday clinical practice
(i.e. absolute adequate-level cleansing success rate in every colon segment versus the ESGE
90% minimum target for each NER1006 regimen per trial) can be extremely confusing for the
clinician reader. I would suggest to narrow down by omitting some of these and mainly focusing
on more clinically-orientated objectives.
4. Why did authors do not present the respective results regarding the Boston Bowel Preparation
Scale (BBPS) assessment since this was included in both MORA and NOCT trials?
5. Page 8, lines 154: “normal patients”. This is not appropriate nomenclature. There are
only patients with or without established risk factors to fail bowel preparation. Please revise
throughout the entire manuscript accordingly.
6. Page 8, lines 154-155: “and patients with characteristics that may contribute to both inadequate
cleansing”. Please define
7. Page 8, lines 156: “hard-to-cleanse”. Why only obese patients and no other categories were
identified among those patients?
8. Page 8, lines 161-167: These information are already available in the literature as well as
within the individual studies. I would suggest to omit them
Review for 10.1186/s12876-022-02106-2 (2022)

Title: 1L NER1006 can improve rates of adequate and high-quality bowel cleansing in the right
colon: a post hoc analysis of two randomised clinical trials
Version: 3 Date: 02 Jan 2022
Reviewer's report:
The authors have been working out all aspects that can improve this manuscript.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-022-02106-2 (2022)

Title: 1L NER1006 can improve rates of adequate and high-quality bowel cleansing in the right
colon: a post hoc analysis of two randomised clinical trials
Version: 3 Date: 03 Jan 2022
Reviewer's report:
Authors have addressed all my comments as well those from other reviewers.
Thank you
Review for 10.1186/s12876-022-02107-1 (2022)

Title: Hepatitis C Positive Organ Transplantation to Negative Recipients at a Multiorgan
Canadian Transplant Centre: Ready for Prime Time
Version: 2 Date: 02 Dec 2021
Reviewer's report:
The submitted manuscript describes a retrospective data review of organ transplant recipients
who were HCV negative but had received HCV positive organ.
I have the following comments
1. HCV positive status shall be written as anti-HCV positive because HCV positive status falsely
connotate for viremic status
2. Table 1: Authors have described about HBsAg, anti-HBc but the same has not been described
in method section
3. Table 3 can easily be avoided in the manuscript
4. Table 4: can be shortened by avoiding the unwanted information such as about HBsAg, anti-
HBs, HIV etc
5. It seems of limited use to describe about the anti-HCV positive but NAT negative donors. In
my opinion, the analysis shall be restricted to NAT positive donors only
6. All the table need better formatting to make them self-explanatory and easy to understand
for the readers
7. Manuscript needs language editing and better organization
Review for 10.1186/s12876-021-02090-z (2022)

Title: Deep muscularis propria tumor invasion without lymph node metastasis as a unique
subclassification of stage IB gastric cancer: a retrospective study
Version: 3 Date: 16 Oct 2021
Reviewer's report:
Major points
The main purpose of this study should be described in the Abstract section.
In the Discussion section, it is described that the dMPN0 patients should receive appropriate
adjuvant chemotherapy. However, it is described in the Methods section "The decision as to
whether patients received postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy depended on the integrated
evaluation of pathological examination, therapy guideline and patient intention." Is there any
possibility that patients who did not receive adjuvant chemotherapy tended to have severe
morbidity and were unable to receive adjuvant chemotherapy as compared to those who did
receive adjuvant chemotherapy?
In the Discussion section, it is described that dMPN0 patients (stage IB) with positive expression
of p53 should accept suitable adjuvant chemotherapy like patients in stage II. However, no data
was presented regarding the prognosis of patients with p53+ dMPN0 who did or did not receive
adjuvant chemotherapy.
Minor points
Please provide example pictures of sMP and dMP.
Please provide representative pictures of immunohistochemical staining interpreted as positive
and negative for all the molecular markers investigated.
Please provide in the Methods section how to decide the factors to be used in multivariate
analysis for OS
Please provide the Kaplan-Meyer curves for sMPN1-2 group according to the status of adjuvant
chemotherapy.
Please provide the number of patients analyzed at each month below all the graphs with Kaplan-
Meir curves.
Please delete the first paragraph in the Discussion section because of the duplication with the
Introduction section.
Please cite relevant articles after the sentence " patients with stage II, rather than with stage IB,
should receive the adjuvant chemotherapy depending on therapy guideline" in the Discussion
section.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-021-02090-z (2022)

Title: Deep muscularis propria tumor invasion without lymph node metastasis as a unique
subclassification of stage IB gastric cancer: a retrospective study
Version: 3 Date: 12 Nov 2021
Reviewer's report:
TO THE AUTHORS:
Authors classified T2 patients into two groups and conducting a detailed prognostic analysis, and
found that the prognosis of dMPN0 (stage IB) gastric cancer contributed to be a poor prognosis
and considered to be new indication criteria for adjuvant chemotherapy. However, there are
several points that remain unclear and to be revised.
Major Comments;
1. The differences of clinicopathological factors between in the sMP group and dMP group
appear to have a significant impact on the survival analysis. Is there a similar difference in
survival when propensity score matching is performed?
2. In this study, many of the mortality events occurred after 5 years. It should be shown the
cancer-specific survival curve and/or recurrence-free survival curve. Especially, in the subgroup
analysis with and without adjuvant chemotherapy (Figure 4B), there does not appear to be a
significant difference in the survival analysis at 5 years after surgery, at which there are no
censored cases at this point.
3. The dMPN0 group tends to have a better prognosis than the sMPN1-2 group although there is
no statistical difference. On this basis, there seems to be little significance in comparing survival
rate of the dMPN0/adjuvant chemotherapy+ group and sMPN1-2 groups.
4. In the multivariate analysis, there are a number of variables whose values are not written. Are
these factors not included in the variables for multivariate analysis? It should be clearly stated.
5. What are the clinical implications of including maximal LDH during follow-up in the
analysis? It seems that LDH levels is elevated in all case of cachexia in the terminal stage of
cancer.
6. sMP and dMP are not commonly assessed. Why not present pathological images of sMP and
dMP to visually demonstrate the diagnostic criteria?
Minor Comments;
1. On 26th line in page 6, the 5-year overall survival rate of dMP / N0 was described to be 91%
while it is described to be 92 % on 32th line in page 6. Similarly, on 32th line in page 6, the 5-
year OS of sMP/N1-2 was described to be 82% while it is described to be 81 % on 38th line in
page 6. Authors should revise to correct values.
2. Authors should add the number at risk table to each Kaplan-Meier curve to clarify the
population in the subgroup analysis.
3. The main purpose of this article is to investigate the prognostic impact of sMP and dMP, and
the correlation analysis with clinical factors shows no difference between EGFR, VEGF, and
HER2. So, description about HER2 should be more concise in Discussion section.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-022-02101-7 (2022)

Title: MS275 as Class I HDAC inhibitor displayed therapeutic potential on malignant ascites
by iTRAQ-based quantitative proteomic analysis
Version: 1 Date: 16 Oct 2021
Reviewer's report:
Page 4. The authors while classifying HDACs should split Class II into Class IIa and Class IIb
HDACs. Moreover, recent  articles should be cited  at reference 8  https://link.springer.com/
chapter/10.1007%2F978-981-15-8179-3_3
Page 4. Due to the important regulation of HDACs in cancer development, HDACs have become
one of the promising anti-cancer targets (no reference is cited). The latest reference https://
link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007%2F978-981-15-8179-3_4
Page 4. Due to the non-specific toxicity of pan-HDAC inhibitors, development of
isoform-selective HDAC inhibitors has become the main direction for HDACI. No
reference is cited. Add the latest reference with relevant content https://link.springer.com/
chapter/10.1007%2F978-981-15-8179-3_4
The authors have mentioned 0 what does this mean. It is not mentioned what were solvent
controls. As HDAC inhibitors come in solid form and need to be reconstituted in solvents in
which they dissolve. Thus authors should clearly mention solvent controls. Further either higher
end solvent control should be used or for each concentration separate solvent control should
be used.
Again in Figure 2, the authors have mentioned control. Clearly mention what is control. What
treatment has been given to control. Otherwise the experiments are not reliable at all.
In all cases 0 and control has been mentioned what is this control is not clear. Untill the authors
will not mention clearly what is this control, the results are highly doubtful.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-022-02101-7 (2022)

Title: MS275 as Class I HDAC inhibitor displayed therapeutic potential on malignant ascites
by iTRAQ-based quantitative proteomic analysis
Version: 1 Date: 16 Nov 2021
Reviewer's report:
Du et al studied HDAC inhibitors for their therapeutic potential on malignant ascites and
identified MS275 as a potential Class I HDAC inhibitor. This is an interesting and technically
sound study.
I have the following minor points.
1.  Why did the authors use proteins with >1.5 fold change were considered for fold change
calculations (P. No. 14), while proteins with >1.3 fold change for Volcano plot analysis (Figure
4B)?
2. What was the labeling efficiency?
3. The database used for bioinformatic analysis (Table 1) should be mentioned in the
Methodology section.
4. Methodology section: “Protein quantification” para, TRAQ should be corrected to “iTRAQ”.
5. Results section: The title “MS275 influenced protein distribution by iTRAQ analysis” should
be modified e.g. “MS275 influenced protein distribution”.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-022-02103-5 (2022)

Title: Near-Infrared Fluorescence Imaging with Indocyanine Green for Assessment of Donor
Livers in A Rat Model of Ischemia-Reperfusion
Version: 3 Date: 22 Sep 2021
Reviewer's report:
The manuscript is very interesting and well written.
The authors concluded that the quantitative evaluation of liver function by ICG fluorescence
imaging is effective in the ischemia-reperfusion model of rat liver, and it has the potential for
donor liver estimation in the rat liver transplantation model in the further study.
The results of this study are very clearly presented.
Minor comment:
In Figure 3, mark histopathological changes in liver tissue in each figure.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-022-02103-5 (2022)

Title: Near-Infrared Fluorescence Imaging with Indocyanine Green for Assessment of Donor
Livers in A Rat Model of Ischemia-Reperfusion
Version: 3 Date: 28 Oct 2021
Reviewer's report:
Shan et al describe in their work "Near-Infrared Fluorescence Imaging with Indocyanine Green
for assessment of donor liver in a rat model of ischemia-reperfusion." the possible impact of
ICG on quality assessment prior to transplantation in a rat ischemia-reperfusion model.
The paper is sound, The authors should include a graph showing more clearly the experimental
design.
Minor English check its required.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-022-02093-4 (2022)

Title: Serum creatinine/cystatin C ratio as a surrogate marker for sarcopenia in patients with
gastric cancer
Version: 1 Date: 04 Sep 2021
Reviewer:  Anders Grubb
Reviewer's report:
The manuscript by Sun et al. contains new and relevant information concerning the use of the
ratio between the levels of creatinine and cystatin C as a marker of sarcopenia in patients with
gastric cancer.
Some references are not the most appropriate ones and should be replaced by more relevant ones.
References 9 and 10 do not contain any information that cystatin C is independent of muscle
mass, or lean tissue mass, and should be replaced, for example, with the references
Vinge E, et al. Relationships among serum cystatin C, serum creatinine, lean tissue mass and
glomerular filtration rate in healthy adults. Scand J Clin Lab Invest 1999;59:587-592.
Grubb A. Cystatin C is indispensable for evaluation of kidney disease. eJIFCC 2017;28:268-276.
http://www.ifcc.org/media/476805/ejifcc2017vol28no4pp268-276.pdf
Reference 39 is used after the sentence: As an indicator of renal function, serum CysC has
recently received greater attention. Serum CysC is a low-molecular-weight protein with a stable
production rate and it can be freely filtered by glomeruli, but this is not shown in this reference. I
suggest that a modern review of cystatin C, for example, "Grubb A. Cystatin C is indispensable
for evaluation of kidney disease. eJIFCC 2017;28:268-276. http://www.ifcc.org/media/476805/
ejifcc2017vol28no4pp268-276.pdf" should replace reference 39 of the present manuscript.
Minor remarks
In tabel 1 "Fmales" should be "Females"
I suggest that "C-index" (concordance index?) is explained.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-022-02093-4 (2022)

Title: Serum creatinine/cystatin C ratio as a surrogate marker for sarcopenia in patients with
gastric cancer
Version: 1 Date: 12 Sep 2021
Reviewer's report:
The authors reported “serum creatinine/cystain C ratio as a surrogate marker for sarcopenica
in patients with gastric cancer”. The authors concluded that serum Cr/CysC ratio can be used
accurately, inexpensively, and easily to evaluate sarcopenia in patients with gastric cancer. Our
study showed that sarcopenia is possible in patients with Cr/CysC <0.67, indicating a poor
prognosis.
There are many critical problems in this paper, I think. Especially from statistical view.
1. The sample size of this cohort is very small. I do not think the results of this study has
robustness.
2. Generally, the range of AUC is from 0.5 (toss the coin) to 1.0 (perfect prediction). I cannot
understand the AUC of CysC is 0.441.
3. I know AUC of ROC is not absolute value. However, I convince the AUC value of 0.665
has no clinical value.
4. The value of correlation coefficient: 0.269 does not have strong correlation,
0.7-1.0: strong correlation, 0.4-0.7; correlation 0.2-0.4; weak correlation
5. The numbers of event of low skeletal muscle mass index is 36 cases. From the statistical
viewpoint, the maximum numbers of covariates that researchers can calculate in multivariate
model is 3 or 4, at most. However, the authors calculate 6 covariates in logistic regression
analysis. This method leads wrong conclusions.
6. The authors perform survival analysis only by univariate model. Multivariable analysis should
be necessary.
7. What is the clinical value of this study? The authors should describe this point at last of
discussion part.
8. The authors did not show the serum creatinine/cystain C ratio when compared other previously
reported factors.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-022-02093-4 (2022)

Title: Serum creatinine/cystatin C ratio as a surrogate marker for sarcopenia in patients with
gastric cancer
Version: 1 Date: 07 Oct 2021
Reviewer's report:
The manuscript is of scientific interest and needs only minor revisions highlighted below:
1) Materials and methods:
- CT imaging was obtained within 1 month preoperatively and serum Cr and CysC
concentrations measured preoperatively.  When serum Cr and CysC concentrations were
obtained?
- Please check skeletal muscle threshold (isn't it -29 to +150 HU?).
- The authors defined sarcopenia as low skeletal muscle mass and low muscle strength or
physical function or only low muscle mass? Please clarify.
- The reference of cut-off values to define sarcopenia (reference 21) is correct? Please check.
- The authors did not show cox regression analysis results. Please clarify.
2) Results:
Table 1: Please replace “Fmale” to “Female” and add the number of patients with sarcopenia.
- According to the text, preoperative anemia predicted sarcopenia in univariate and multivariate
analysis.  However, the results weren’t shown in Table 2. Please check.
- Some variables predicted sarcopenia in Table 2 were not cited in the text.
- Table 2: results of serum Cr/Cys C ratio and TNM "*” are missing.
- What the authors mean by the concept of sarcopenia severity? Serum Cr/CysC ratio, and Cr
was positively correlated with SMI and SMA. Did authors perform the association between
biomarkers and sarcopenia severity (low skeletal muscle mass and low muscle strength or
physical function)? Please clarify.
3) Discussion
- If have other studies, please discuss the relationship between Cr/CysC ratio and sarcopenia in
patients with cancer.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-022-02093-4 (2022)

Title: Serum creatinine/cystatin C ratio as a surrogate marker for sarcopenia in patients with
gastric cancer
Version: 2 Date: 24 Nov 2021
Reviewer:  Anders Grubb
Reviewer's report:
The revised manuscript has addressed the concerns of the reviewers and is improved. But
references 10 and 39 are identical so reference 39 can be removed.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-022-02093-4 (2022)

Title: Serum creatinine/cystatin C ratio as a surrogate marker for sarcopenia in patients with
gastric cancer
Version: 2 Date: 30 Nov 2021
Reviewer's report:
- The authors include patients with low muscle mass in the same group (sarcopenic) of patients
with low muscle mass and function. The results may change if the analyzes are done with two
groups separately. The authors should do the analyses separately for the two groups.
- Table 1: Please replace “Fmale” to “Female”.
- Table 2: Please replace  “Hypoproteinemia" to "anemia"
- The authors should consider other variables in multiple cox regression analysis (age, BMI,
etc)...
Review for 10.1186/s12876-022-02093-4 (2022)

Title: Serum creatinine/cystatin C ratio as a surrogate marker for sarcopenia in patients with
gastric cancer
Version: 3 Date: 18 Dec 2021
Reviewer:  Anders Grubb
Reviewer's report:
The revised manuscript has used the suggestions by the reviewers.
The reference:    [10] Grubb Anders,Cystatin C....... should be [10] Grubb A,   Cystatin C......
Review for 10.1186/s12876-022-02097-0 (2022)

Title: PADI4 promotes epithelial-mesenchymal transition(EMT) in gastric cancer via the
upregulation of interleukin 8
Version: 3 Date: 07 Oct 2021
Reviewer:  Gang Liao
Reviewer's report:
The article reached this conclusion: PADI4 promotes EMT in gastric cancer via the upregulation
of interleukin 8. Although the article is interesting, but it needs attention to the following
comments.
1.The gastric cancer tissues used for Real-time PCR and Western blotting were collected at
Shandong Province Qianfoshan Hospital.GC tissue array used for immunohistochemistry was
obtained commercially from Alenabio. Why the gastric cancer tissues used in these three
experiments are of different sources?
2. Why did the authors choose the two human GC cell lines(SGC-7901, MGC80-3) for the
experiment?
3. The authors only studied that the overexpression of PADI4 up-regulated interleukin 8 in the
human GC cell lines. Therefore the strength of the argument is weak. It is necessary to further
study whether interference with PADI4 down-regulates interleukin 8 in the human GC cell lines.
4. It is recommended to indicate the magnification in these figures(Figure 1 D and E, Figure 2
F, Figure 7 A and C)
Review for 10.1186/s12876-022-02097-0 (2022)

Title: PADI4 promotes epithelial-mesenchymal transition(EMT) in gastric cancer via the
upregulation of interleukin 8
Version: 5 Date: 01 Dec 2021
Reviewer:  Gang Liao
Reviewer's report:
This article reached this conclusion: PADI4 promotes EMT in gastric cancer via the upregulation
of interleukin 8. The article is interesting, and the author's modification is appropriate. Therefore,
I recommend accepting this article.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-022-02097-0 (2022)

Title: PADI4 promotes epithelial-mesenchymal transition(EMT) in gastric cancer via the
upregulation of interleukin 8
Version: 5 Date: 13 Dec 2021
Reviewer's report:
The authors have responded to all the reviewers' comments and made the necessary changes
in the manuscript. However, there is one issue that needs to be addressed before accepting the
manuscript for publication.
1)  The cytokine levels (IL6 and IL8) in the supernatants of PADI4-transfected GC cells
(SGC-7901) presented in figure 5A seem different from the data given in the supplementary
information.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-022-02098-z (2022)

Title: Serum ferritin levels are associated with advanced liver fibrosis in treatment-naive
autoimmune hepatitis
Version: 0 Date: 21 Nov 2021
Reviewer's report:
Chen et al investigated the association between variables related to iron metabolism and liver
fibrosis in untreated patients with autoimmune hepatitis.
The investigation could be of interest however there are several major limitations:
1. Introduction: Liver biopsy in AIH is essential not only for fibrosis estimation but also for
establishment of diagnosis. So, the aim of the study to potentially associate iron metabolism
variables with fibrosis stage in patients with AIH at diagnosis (before treatment) is weak and
ambiguous, since liver biopsy for diagnosis is absolutely necessary. In addition, at diagnosis
there is usually increased inflammation in the liver with acute phase reaction, so ferritin can
not be a reliable marker for fibrosis since it could reflect inflammation. On the contrary, if the
same study was contacted in treated patients after remission it could make sense for estimate
disease progression.
Minor: ref 1 is old, could be replaced with newer
2. Study population: the diagnosis of AIH is also ambiguous. For research purposes the diagnosis
of AIH should be based on the IAIHG criteria 1999 and/or 2008 but not only to histology as the
text implies (…..and/or (3) histological features indicative of AIH). It is well known that there
are no pathognomonic histological features for AIH and the diagnosis should combine exclusion
of other causes, IgG levels and autoantibodies.
3. General characteristics and lab tests: the autoantibodies starting dilution should be mentioned.
In addition, the cut off values for IgG, AST, ALT and ALP should be included.
4. Statistics: AOC for ferritin should be included as well the DeLong test for best cut off ferritin
level predicting advanced fibrosis stage. Sensitivity and specificity should also be calculated
5. Results: Table 1 should include the percentages of the patients according to the detected
autoantibodies (ANA, SMA, LKM, anti-SLA/LP). In addition, the IAIHG score of 1999 and the
simplified score 2008 should be included in the Table. According to the results 14.4% of the
patients did not have any autoantibody detectable. How the diagnosis was established in these
patients, given that liver biopsies were not stained for hemosiderin deposits and there was no
genetic testing for hemochromatosis? Furthermore, according to Table 1, TSI in some patients
was >45%. These patients should had been tested for hemochromatosis.
In addition, Table 1 should include mHAI activity score.
Finally, after AOC analysis and finding the best cut off point, a Table based to this cut off level
of ferritin should be presented with patients characteristics according to this cut off, in order
to prove that the patients with higher histological activity scores, ALT and IgG did not have
increased inflammatory activity. In addition, if histological activity score enters the multivariate
analysis, it is not sure that fibrosis will remain in the model.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-022-02098-z (2022)

Title: Serum ferritin levels are associated with advanced liver fibrosis in treatment-naive
autoimmune hepatitis
Version: 0 Date: 21 Nov 2021
Reviewer's report:
I read with interest "Serum ferritin level is associated with advanced liver fibrosis in treatment-
naive autoimmune hepatitis:; the article is interesting; However; there are major concerns:
- Methods: Sample size calculation and power of the study are important to validate the findings
of the study; also; being a retrospective study raise the possibility of bias.
- Results: not well presented; especially table (1); I think to present fibrosis stages as S1, S2...etc
will be misleading to the readers as results of liver biopsy if related to fibrosis will be interpreted
as F0, F1, F2...etc; if related to activity wil be interpreted as  A1,...etc; S1, S2 this only refers
to steatosis evaluation by fibroscan.
-Discussion: You should clarify more in the discussion the impact of these findings on our
current practice.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-022-02100-8 (2022)

Title: Intestinal Claudin-7 deficiency impacts the intestinal microbiota in mice with colitis
Version: 0 Date: 24 Apr 2021
Reviewer's report:
This manuscript investigated the role of claudin-7 in intestinal damage repair. The topic is
relevant, as claudin-7 has been reported to be decreased in lBD, and claudin-7 ko has been
demonstrated to cause decreased intestinal stem cell function and intestinal inflammation.
However, the current study is preliminary and descriptive.
Specific comments
1. Animal naming system and shortened is very confusing and rather disruptive for the reviewer
to understand the manuscript. They do not follow conventional mutant mice naming system
and in the microbiome part of the manuscript, an even confusing shortened names are used to
indicate the already confusing name. Description of animals is inadequate, it is not clear what
exactly mice are used for test and control. Although VilCreERT2 transgenic mice are used,
no description of tamoxifen injection is described. In addition, Dr. Sylvie Robine is a female
professor.
2. Rather than a good model for IBD, DSS treatment is a better model for intestinal epithelial
damage. The description should be revised accordingly throughout the manuscript.
3. Fig. 1-2, when possible, individual data points should be shown in addition to average and SE.
4. Fig. 1E. The section of colon shown is not clear, histology also need quantification.
5. Characterization of the colon phenotype, including proliferation cell number, apoptotic cell
number, epithelial cell migration, cytokine production, immune cell number, and immune cell
population remain to be quantified.
6. Fig 2A-C. The author claimed that there is decreased Muc2 producing goblets in claudin-7
KO mice, however, this is not a fair comparison, as claudin-7 KO mice treated with DSS have no
epithelium left, thus the loss of Muc2 producing cell may simply caused by loss of all epithelial
cells. The fraction of Muc2 producing goblet cells of all epithelial cells should be measured.
7. Fig 2D. The images shown in D does not match quantification shown in E. What is the reason
for this?
8. Description of microbiome studies is inadequate. Only methods for alfa and beta diversity
calculation are described, while a lot more analyses were done.
9. Fig. 3-4. Fonts in figure panels are too small to see.
10. Although some differences can be seen, the contribution of altered microbiome to DSS
induced damage was not determined. How dose reducing bacterial load affect DSS induced
tissue damage?
Review for 10.1186/s12876-022-02100-8 (2022)

Title: Intestinal Claudin-7 deficiency impacts the intestinal microbiota in mice with colitis
Version: 0 Date: 19 May 2021
Reviewer's report:
In previous research of this lab, non-tight junction effects of claudin-7 deficiency have been
characterized. The present study continues on this topic by examining claudin-7 deficiency in
a DSS-induced colitis mouse model.
It is shown here that in DSS-treated mice the Cldn7-deficiency causes (i) the intestinal damage to
become worse, (ii) the mucus barrier being impaired which may increase the access to bacteria,
(iii) CreERT2 mice having a greater reduction in intestinal microbial diversity than CreW mice,
and (iv) phylum proteobacteria E. Shigella being the most significant species in CreERT2 mice.
Specific points:
In the Abstract as well as in the Conclusions it is claimed that the results of this study provide
a new basis for IBD treatment, but no idea how this should work was given. Therefore, this
statement should be removed at both sites.
Fig. 3: Letterings are too small, all lines too thin.
Fig. 4: All parts of the Figure are too small.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-022-02100-8 (2022)

Title: Intestinal Claudin-7 deficiency impacts the intestinal microbiota in mice with colitis
Version: 1 Date: 18 Sep 2021
Reviewer's report:
Regarding the concerns of reviewer 2, point 1 (claimed new basis for IBD treatment) was
sufficently solved, as these statements were removed.
Regarding point 2 and 3 (figure letterings too small), the figures are re-aranged, but the much-
too-small lettering is unchanged. Especially Figs. 3 and 4 contain text which cannot be read even
on a large monitor. The worst example is the non-readable text in Fig. 3-A and -C, upper right
corner. The Figures have to be re-done, not just re-arranged.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-022-02100-8 (2022)

Title: Intestinal Claudin-7 deficiency impacts the intestinal microbiota in mice with colitis
Version: 1 Date: 24 Sep 2021
Reviewer's report:
The author performed some of the suggested changes. However, some important points and easy
to change aspects remain unaddressed.
1. The animal naming system was not changed. Although a previous publication used the naming
system, it does not mean it is correct and need to be consistent with. The authors indicated
that they compared Cldn7 fl/fl CreERT2 and Cldn7 fl/fl CreW group. What is the CreW mice?
Pubmed search did not turn out anything.
2. It has been reported that tamoxifen treatment in VilCreERT2 can cause genome toxicity and
impair stem cell function (Bohin, et al, Stem Cell Reports 2018). How does the author exclude
that the phenotypes reported in this manuscript is not caused by this tamoxifen-VilCreERT2
effect, rather than specific effect of Cldn7 deletion? Cldn7 fl/fl VilCreERT2 and Cldn7 +/+
VilCreERT2 mice need to be compared.
3. For the microbiome figures. The naming was not changed. If the graphing package does not
allow more characters used, either another graphing package need to be used, or the graphs need
to be post processed using software such as CorelDRAW or Adobe Illustrator. The fonts remain
to be very small to see.
4. The authors claim that some of the DSS phenotype has been published previously. Does this
mean Fig 1. is basically replicating previous results?
5. For Muc2 and Bacterial translocation studies, only 3 mice with large variation between
animals are shown. This is not convincing. More animals are needed for these studies.
6. The fraction of Muc2 positive cell issue is not resolved. Can number of Muc2 positive cell
per total epithelial cell be counted in colon in all groups of mice.
7. New Fig. 3 and 4, fonts are still too small to see.
8. New Fig. 5-7. Although some more detailed characterization of microbiome is performed,
it still does not address if the microbiome change is a driver for Cldn7 to impact DSS induced
disease, or independent events. How does antibiotic treatment affect DSS induced epithelial
damage in control and induced Cldn7 KO mice?
9. Writing can be improved across the manuscript to make it clear and accurate. For example,
the claudin-7 KO is tamoxifen-induced KO, this should be specified in the manuscript.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-022-02100-8 (2022)

Title: Intestinal Claudin-7 deficiency impacts the intestinal microbiota in mice with colitis
Version: 5 Date: 01 Dec 2021
Reviewer's report:
Fig 2B-E, data from all replicate experiments should be combined for statistical analysis.
If necessary, appropriate normalization and batch effect correction methods can be used, to
normalize potential differences in different replicate experiments.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-022-02096-1 (2022)

Title: The effect of group-based education on gastrointestinal symptoms and quality of life in
patients with celiac disease: Randomized controlled clinical trial
Version: 6 Date: 18 Oct 2021
Reviewer's report:
In this interesting and clear study, the authors assessed the efficacy of a group-based education
in terms of quality of life and gastrointestinal symtpoms of celiac patients.
I found the study to be very innovative in the field.
I have no specific comments about statistical analysis and results which are very concise and
clear.
A minor point could be to obtain patients' subjective feedback about this method of education,
if available (i.e. level of satisfaction, reasons for lost at follow up,etc..:).
Review for 10.1186/s12876-022-02096-1 (2022)

Title: The effect of group-based education on gastrointestinal symptoms and quality of life in
patients with celiac disease: Randomized controlled clinical trial
Version: 7 Date: 02 Jan 2022
Reviewer's report:
The authors adequately fixed the major issues that we found.
I confirm that it is an original and interesting study, with clear and concise results.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-022-02096-1 (2022)

Title: The effect of group-based education on gastrointestinal symptoms and quality of life in
patients with celiac disease: Randomized controlled clinical trial
Version: 7 Date: 04 Jan 2022
Reviewer:  Pilvi Laurikka
Reviewer's report:
Thank you from taking into account my suggestions to improve your manuscript. Some of the
added parts include some minor grammar errors, but nothing that would make the understanding
of the text difficult. I am satisfied with the clarifications made and I'll recommend to accept the
manuscript for publication. If you'd like to take language check for newly added sections, there's
no need for another check by the reviewers after that.