Reviewer ’s report  
 
Title: Role of HPV 16 variants among cervical carcinoma samples from Northeastern Brazil  
 
Version: 0 Date: 26 Mar 2020  
 
Reviewer's report:  
 
The title does not explain the main subject and results presented in the manuscript. I suggest 
authors to add term ″c arcinoma″ and to consider the title ″Role of HPV 16 variants among 
cervical carcinoma samples from Northeastern Brazil″.  
 
Abstract I suggest term ″epidermoid carcinoma″ to be replaced with "squamous cell carcinoma".  
 
Introduction: Some parts of the section  Introduction appears good, but the aim of this study is 
missing. The reader has no insight what is primary focus of the research.  
 
Material and Method section has several disadvantages. Some parts of this section are 
unnecessarily described in detail, su ch as, sample calculation and DNA extraction that was 
carried out in accordance with the manufacturer's recommendations, without modification.    
 
Other technical comments:  
-Page 8, line 5: "Cervical tumor fragments identified by gynecological examination were then 
placed in microtubes containing 1 mL of RNA Later solution". This sentence is unclear. How 
cancer fragment can be obtained by gynecological examination? If authors used biopsy 
procedure, please describe it.  
 
-Page 9, line 31: The subtitle is not precise and need revision because in first round convettional 
PCR was done, after that, in second round Nested PCR were used. I suggest short subtitle 
"Detection of HPV DNA".  
-Page 11, line 1: The titles of Table 1 nee d revision according to identifeid HPV DNA.  
 
- Page 13, line 1: What "automatic sequencing" means? It should be indicated that is a Sanger 
sequencing method was used.  
 
-Page 13, line 42: Sequence of specific primers for LCR and E6 region didn't show or 
appropriate reference is not given.  
 
 
If DNA sequences were submitted to GenBank, please, enter the Accession numbers of your 
isolates.  
 
Since the authors compare certain results depending on the stage of cervical cancer, I suggest 
that in section Material and Method FIGO system to be described, since the staging system for 
cervical cancer developed by the International Federation of Obstetrics and Gynecology or FIGO 
is used.  
 
Results   A serious disadvantage of this section is that the authors used text to present the most 
important results of their research, without  illustrative materials (Tables and Figures). Because 
of that it is very hard to assess the utility of the results.  On the other hand, the authors paid much 
attention to side task, such as, soc iodemographic characteristic and risk cofactors  for acquiring 
HPV infection. The phylogenetic tree is presented in poor resolution so  I am not able  to give a 
proper comment on results presented by it.  
 
-Page 15, line 12: "The majority of these women wer e in the age group 40 to 49 years of age 
(34/28.33%)…..etc." Number and percentage were presented incorrectly and should be replaced 
with 34 (28.33%). This manner could be used throughout the manuscript. Also, authors would 
have to decide whether to use on e or two decimals places and unify number of decimal places in 
manuscript.  
 
-Page 20, line 21: I propose that the authors present HPV 16 variants according to histologically 
different types of tumors and according to FIGO stage. It can be presented in Tab le or Graph.  
 
-Page 20, line 53: Table 6 is refered in the text but table 5 nor table 6 are presented in 
manuscrpt?  
 
-Page 21, line 28: Fequence of sublineage of HPV16 should be described separatly with new 
subtitle and represent in Table or graphic.  
 
Discussion and Conclusions In this section, the authors mostly presented  results of other 
researchers. Discussion and comparison of observed results with findings from previous and 
similar studies are weak or do not exist. Conclusions are too general and do not respond with 
obtained data.  
 
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.  
 
Unable to assess  
 
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the data shown?  
If not, please explain in your comments to the authors.  
 
No 
 
 
 
 
Are you ab le to assess any statistics in the manus cript or would you recommend an 
additional statistical review?  
If an additional statistical review is recommended, please speci fy what aspects require further 
assessment in your comments to the editors.  
 
I am able to assess the statistics  
 
Quality of written English  
Please indicate the quality of language in the manuscript:  
 
Acceptable  
 
Declaration of competing interests  
Please complete a declaration of competing interests, conside ring the following questions:  
 
1. Have you in the past five years received reimbursements, f ees, funding, or salary from an 
organisation that may in any way gain or lose financial ly from the publication of this 
manuscript, either now or in the future?  
 
2. Do you hold any stocks or shares in an organisation t hat 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 that I have no competing intere sts 
 
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal. I understan d that my name  will be included 
on my report to the authors and, if the manuscript is accepted f or publication, my named report 
including any attachments I upload will be posted on the website along with the authors' 
responses. I agree for my report to be made available under an Open Access Creative Commons 
CC-BY license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ). I understand that any comments 
which I do not wish to be included in my  named report can be in cluded as confidential comments 
to the editors, which will not be published.  
 
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal