Reviewer ’s report 
 
Title: Association between the ERCC1 polymorphism and platinum -based chemotherapy 
effectiveness in ovarian cancer: a meta -analysis  
 
Version: 0 Date: 24 Mar 2016  
 
Reviewer: P Luealon  
 
Reviewer's report:  
 
Dear Authors,  
 
Your study is an interesting concept. However, there are some points could be improved.  
1. Authors should provide more context and explanation in the background why study should 
be conducted. For example, why you select the C19007T polymorphism of the ERCC1 in 
this study?  
2. There are many parameters about effectiveness of chemotherapy e.g. response rate, 
progression free survival and overall survival. Why do authors choose only numb er of 
responder and non -responder as chemotherapy effectiveness?  
3. Authors should provide definitions of responder or resistant in your study. If the patient has 
partial response, stable disease or progressive disease, are they included in your study and 
why?  
4. Authors should provide more detail of inclusion and exclusion criteria.  
5. Authors should provide process of reviewed the articles and extracted the data e.g. if there 
are a questionable about inclusion or exclusion of article.  
6. I suggested addin g more detail characteristics of the studies e.g. regimen of chemotherapy.     
7. I suggested adding some implication of the findings in conclusion of abstract.  
8. I suggested adding number and percentage of each group in the table 2 and 3.       
Are the methods appropriate and well described?  
If not, please specify what is required in your comments to the authors.  
 
No 
 
 
 
Does the work include the necessary controls?  
If not, please specify which controls are required in your comments to the authors.  
 
Yes 
 
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the data shown?  
If not, please explain in your comments to the authors.  
 
Yes 
 
Are you able to assess any statistics in the manuscript 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.  
 
I recommend additional statistical review  
 
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 comp eting 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 relati ng 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 interests.  
 
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal. 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 at tachments 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 included as confidential comments  
to the editors, which will not be published.  
 
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal