Reviewer ’s report  
 
Title: Defining the short -term disease recurrence after Loop Electrosurgical Excision Proce dure 
(LEEP)  
 
Version: 0 Date: 02 Oct 2019  
 
Reviewer: Adriana Yoshida  
 
Reviewer's report:  
It is an interesting retrospective study that focus on the follow -up of women with cervical pre 
invasive lesions treated with LEEP. However, there are some points to be clari fied. 
 
Methods  
1) I believe that the study was approved by the University ethics committee, but this information 
is missing.  
 
2) More technical details about LEEP, laser ablation and endocervical curettage (EEC) 
procedures are needed. For EEC were women submitted to local anesthesia, in follow up visits? 
Please clarify criteria for using laser in combination with the LEEP: " freq uently utilizes laser 
ablation in combination with LEEP, for large lesions"  
 
3) After one year women were discharged to be followed up where? And how? Any specific 
recommendation?  
 
Discussion  
1) When did HPV vaccination start in Calgary?  
 
2) I suggest to rephrase this: "A final limiting factor for this study is the lack of information on 
HPV vaccination status or HPV  genotyping, which is not currently part of the standard of care in 
Canada".  
 
3) "The majority of published literature on rates of treatment success and recurrence rates of CIN 
2-3 indicate variable numbers to what has been documented in the Calgary Zone ". What about 
the heterogeneity of total time of follow up?  
 
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.  
 
No 
 
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supporte d by the data shown?  
If not, please explain in your comments to the authors.  
 
Yes 
 
Are you able to assess any statistics in the manus cript or would you recommend an 
additional statistical review?  
If an additional statistical review is recommended, please spe cify 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 comp lete a declaration of competing interests, considering 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 financially from the publication of t his 
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 apply ing 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 y es to any, please give details below.  
 
I declare that I have no competing interest  
 
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 for publicat ion, 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