Title: The expression and clinical significance of CFAP65 in colon cancer
Version: 0 Date: 09 Feb 2024
Reviewer:  Pramod Kumar Tiwari
Reviewer's report:
Report:
In this manuscript the authors have investigated the prognostic significance of CFAP65 in
colon cancer. Based on their observations (IHC and GO analysis), they suggest CFAP65 to be
a potential predictive prognostic marker for colon cancer. While the present investigation is
interesting, it has several limitations, as mentioned under comments.
Comments:
1. The objective of the study needs to be made clearer and more directed. It should be based
on the facts or some previous indications on direct or indirect involvement of the target gene/
protein (e.g., CFAP65) in the said pathology, e.g., colon cancer. There are so many molecules
or genes associated with cancer, the relevance of choosing one, e.g., CFAP65, in this case, for
detailed study should be explained. Thus, ‘introduction’ section needs to be revised.
2. High and low expressions are only virtual (visual perception) values and may not be of much
use in quantitative estimation, unless cytophotometrically estimated, even being in arbitrary
units. For a decisive evaluation the values should be close to actual, which can be obtained by
several methods, such as quantitative immunoblots and QRT-PCR. Authors could have taken
recently available fresh samples for this analysis. This could provide strength to the present
observation and inference drawn. Further, a stage-wise quantitative evaluation may be able to
indicate the expression values (threshold) critical for prognostic decision.
3. What is the expression level in non-tumor or healthy control samples? For a comparison it is
essential. The low expressing samples or high expressing samples may create confusion on the
pathological state (normal, early or late) of the samples analyzed.
4. Unless IHC results are validated with advanced quantitative biochemical or molecular
techniques, any decision based solely on IHC is likely to inherit errors and raise doubts of
reproducibility.
5. The authors should also discuss the likely physiological role that CFAP65 might be playing
in colon cancer and the effect of its poor expression. Moreover, it is very likely that CFAP65
may not be acting alone, but in association with other genes/molecules. Hence, the GO results
should be discussed in the light of the above.
Title: The expression and clinical significance of CFAP65 in colon cancer
Version: 0 Date: 09 Feb 2024
Reviewer:  Pramod Kumar Tiwari
Reviewer's report:
Report:
In this manuscript the authors have investigated the prognostic significance of CFAP65 in
colon cancer. Based on their observations (IHC and GO analysis), they suggest CFAP65 to be
a potential predictive prognostic marker for colon cancer. While the present investigation is
interesting, it has several limitations, as mentioned under comments.
Comments:
1. The objective of the study needs to be made clearer and more directed. It should be based
on the facts or some previous indications on direct or indirect involvement of the target gene/
protein (e.g., CFAP65) in the said pathology, e.g., colon cancer. There are so many molecules
or genes associated with cancer, the relevance of choosing one, e.g., CFAP65, in this case, for
detailed study should be explained. Thus, ‘introduction’ section needs to be revised.
2. High and low expressions are only virtual (visual perception) values and may not be of much
use in quantitative estimation, unless cytophotometrically estimated, even being in arbitrary
units. For a decisive evaluation the values should be close to actual, which can be obtained by
several methods, such as quantitative immunoblots and QRT-PCR. Authors could have taken
recently available fresh samples for this analysis. This could provide strength to the present
observation and inference drawn. Further, a stage-wise quantitative evaluation may be able to
indicate the expression values (threshold) critical for prognostic decision.
3. What is the expression level in non-tumor or healthy control samples? For a comparison it is
essential. The low expressing samples or high expressing samples may create confusion on the
pathological state (normal, early or late) of the samples analyzed.
4. Unless IHC results are validated with advanced quantitative biochemical or molecular
techniques, any decision based solely on IHC is likely to inherit errors and raise doubts of
reproducibility.
5. The authors should also discuss the likely physiological role that CFAP65 might be playing
in colon cancer and the effect of its poor expression. Moreover, it is very likely that CFAP65
may not be acting alone, but in association with other genes/molecules. Hence, the GO results
should be discussed in the light of the above.
Please review this paper.
user
Title: The expression and clinical significance of CFAP65 in colon cancer
Version: 0 Date: 09 Feb 2024
Reviewer:  Pramod Kumar Tiwari
Reviewer's report:
Report:
In this manuscript the authors have investigated the prognostic significance of CFAP65 in
colon cancer. Based on their observations (IHC and GO analysis), they suggest CFAP65 to be
a potential predictive prognostic marker for colon cancer. While the present investigation is
interesting, it has several limitations, as mentioned under comments.
Comments:
1. The objective of the study needs to be made clearer and more directed. It should be based
on the facts or some previous indications on direct or indirect involvement of the target gene/
protein (e.g., CFAP65) in the said pathology, e.g., colon cancer. There are so many molecules
or genes associated with cancer, the relevance of choosing one, e.g., CFAP65, in this case, for
detailed study should be explained. Thus, ‘introduction’ section needs to be revised.
2. High and low expressions are only virtual (visual perception) values and may not be of much
use in quantitative estimation, unless cytophotometrically estimated, even being in arbitrary
units. For a decisive evaluation the values should be close to actual, which can be obtained by
several methods, such as quantitative immunoblots and QRT-PCR. Authors could have taken
recently available fresh samples for this analysis. This could provide strength to the present
observation and inference drawn. Further, a stage-wise quantitative evaluation may be able to
indicate the expression values (threshold) critical for prognostic decision.
3. What is the expression level in non-tumor or healthy control samples? For a comparison it is
essential. The low expressing samples or high expressing samples may create confusion on the
pathological state (normal, early or late) of the samples analyzed.
4. Unless IHC results are validated with advanced quantitative biochemical or molecular
techniques, any decision based solely on IHC is likely to inherit errors and raise doubts of
reproducibility.
5. The authors should also discuss the likely physiological role that CFAP65 might be playing
in colon cancer and the effect of its poor expression. Moreover, it is very likely that CFAP65
may not be acting alone, but in association with other genes/molecules. Hence, the GO results
should be discussed in the light of the above.
assistant