Reviewer's report
Title:Treatment of chronic HCV genotype 1 infection with telaprevir: A Bayesian
mixed treatment comparison of fixed-length and response-guided treatment
regimens in treatment-naive and -experienced patients
Version: 1Date:7 September 2013
Reviewer: Pavel Strnad
Reviewer's report:
Chronic hepatitis C is a major health problem and although the current therapy
iseffective, it is associated with significant adverse effects. Therefore, it is
imperative to identify treatment regimen, which are both efficient and well
tolerated. To do so, Goralczyk et al. compared different telaprevir-containing
therapeutic schemes using a Bayesian mixed comparison.
This is an interesting and well-performed study which will be of interest to the
readers of BMC Gastroenterology. However, before this paper can be accepted,
a few things should be clarified (minor essential revisions):
- the description of the treatment schemes seeems to be inconsistent throughout
the manuscript: for example, Figure 1 suggests that group D was subjected to a
12 week treatment with TVR+IFN+RBV only while abstract describes it as a
treatment with TVR+IFN+RBV for 12 weeks followed by 12 weeks of RBV+IFN....
another discrepancies seem to be in the other figure legends... Please check the
complete manuscript for consistency.
- the manuscript contains multiple typos (page 8- "and and", legend Figure
5-"imputed", page 12, 1st line-"do not no how", page 17-"schema" etc). A
thourough language editing would be desirable.
- it was not quite clear to me whether the SVR rates refer to patients who entered
the study or to patients who completed the treatment... in fact, it would be good
to know whether both analyses yield similar results or not
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Needs some language corrections before being
published
Statistical review: Yes, but I do not feel adequately qualified to assess the
statistics.
Declaration of competing interests:
No competing interests.
Reviewer's report
Title:Treatment of chronic HCV genotype 1 infection with telaprevir: A Bayesian
mixed treatment comparison of fixed-length and response-guided treatment
regimens in treatment-naive and -experienced patients
Version: 1Date:7 September 2013
Reviewer: Pavel Strnad
Reviewer's report:
Chronic hepatitis C is a major health problem and although the current therapy
iseffective, it is associated with significant adverse effects. Therefore, it is
imperative to identify treatment regimen, which are both efficient and well
tolerated. To do so, Goralczyk et al. compared different telaprevir-containing
therapeutic schemes using a Bayesian mixed comparison.
This is an interesting and well-performed study which will be of interest to the
readers of BMC Gastroenterology. However, before this paper can be accepted,
a few things should be clarified (minor essential revisions):
- the description of the treatment schemes seeems to be inconsistent throughout
the manuscript: for example, Figure 1 suggests that group D was subjected to a
12 week treatment with TVR+IFN+RBV only while abstract describes it as a
treatment with TVR+IFN+RBV for 12 weeks followed by 12 weeks of RBV+IFN....
another discrepancies seem to be in the other figure legends... Please check the
complete manuscript for consistency.
- the manuscript contains multiple typos (page 8- "and and", legend Figure
5-"imputed", page 12, 1st line-"do not no how", page 17-"schema" etc). A
thourough language editing would be desirable.
- it was not quite clear to me whether the SVR rates refer to patients who entered
the study or to patients who completed the treatment... in fact, it would be good
to know whether both analyses yield similar results or not
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Needs some language corrections before being
published
Statistical review: Yes, but I do not feel adequately qualified to assess the
statistics.
Declaration of competing interests:
No competing interests.
Please review this paper.
user
Reviewer's report
Title:Treatment of chronic HCV genotype 1 infection with telaprevir: A Bayesian
mixed treatment comparison of fixed-length and response-guided treatment
regimens in treatment-naive and -experienced patients
Version: 1Date:7 September 2013
Reviewer: Pavel Strnad
Reviewer's report:
Chronic hepatitis C is a major health problem and although the current therapy
iseffective, it is associated with significant adverse effects. Therefore, it is
imperative to identify treatment regimen, which are both efficient and well
tolerated. To do so, Goralczyk et al. compared different telaprevir-containing
therapeutic schemes using a Bayesian mixed comparison.
This is an interesting and well-performed study which will be of interest to the
readers of BMC Gastroenterology. However, before this paper can be accepted,
a few things should be clarified (minor essential revisions):
- the description of the treatment schemes seeems to be inconsistent throughout
the manuscript: for example, Figure 1 suggests that group D was subjected to a
12 week treatment with TVR+IFN+RBV only while abstract describes it as a
treatment with TVR+IFN+RBV for 12 weeks followed by 12 weeks of RBV+IFN....
another discrepancies seem to be in the other figure legends... Please check the
complete manuscript for consistency.
- the manuscript contains multiple typos (page 8- "and and", legend Figure
5-"imputed", page 12, 1st line-"do not no how", page 17-"schema" etc). A
thourough language editing would be desirable.
- it was not quite clear to me whether the SVR rates refer to patients who entered
the study or to patients who completed the treatment... in fact, it would be good
to know whether both analyses yield similar results or not
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Needs some language corrections before being
published
Statistical review: Yes, but I do not feel adequately qualified to assess the
statistics.
Declaration of competing interests:
No competing interests.
assistant