Reviewer ’s report  
 
Title: Benign metastasizing leiomyoma presenting as multiple cystic pulmonary nodules: A case 
report  
 
Version: 0 Date: 02 Apr 2016  
 
Reviewer: Octavian Ioachimescu  
 
Reviewer's report:  
 
Interesting case!  
Have the Pathologist made special stains for HMB -45 and VEGF -D (and maybe even for S100)? 
What I am getting at is the following: how do we know that this is not a case of LAM 
(lymphangioleiomyomatosis)? The uterine leiomyomas and the cavitary pulmonary les ions 
would fit very well, hence I would recommend the discussion to focus on this important 
differential diagnosis.  
Are the methods appropriate and well described?  
If not, please specify what is required in your comments to the authors.  
 
Unable to assess  
 
Does the work include the necessary controls?  
If not, please specify  which controls are required in your comments to the authors.  
 
No 
 
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the data shown?  
If not, please explain in your comments to the authors.  
 
Unable to assess  
 
Are you able to assess any statistics in the manuscr ipt or would you recommend an  
additional statistical review?  
If an additional statistical review is recommended, please specify what aspects require further  
assessment in your comments to the editors.  
 
Not relevant to this manuscript  
 
Quality of written English  
Please indicate the quality of language in the manuscript:  
 
Needs some language corrections before being published  
 
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 stock s 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.  
 
No conflicts  
 
I agree to the open peer review policy of the j ournal. I understand that my name will be included  
on my report to the authors and, if the manuscript is accepted for publication, my named report  
including any attachments I upload will be posted on the website along with the authors'  
responses. I agree f or my report to be made available under an Open Access Creative Commons  
CC-BY license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ). I understand that any comments  
which I do not wish to be included in my named report can be included as confidential commen ts 
to the editors, which will not be published.  
 
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal