Reviewer's report
Title:Multicenter Comparison of PEG-IFN 2a or 2b Plus Ribavirin for
Treatment-naive HCV Patient in Favorable IL-28B Polymorphism Dominant Area
Version: 1Date:31 December 2012
Reviewer: Steffen Zopf
Reviewer's report:
Jin and colleagues compared the two different PEG-interferons, alpha-2a and
alpha-2b, in combination with ribavirin in a Korean cohort with chronic hepatitis C
genotype 1 and 2/3. The data were collected in a multicenter trial and analyzed
retrospectively. The authors analyzed data of 661 treatment-naïve patients from
14 sites. This big cohort in a multicenter trial is a major plus factor of the study.
The authors themselves named some of the limitations of the study: The study
has only a retrospective design, the data of dose modifications and AE
monitoring were not strictly controlled and RVR rates were not evaluates for the
whole cohort. The third point is due to the collection date of data from 2000-2008,
where RVR was no standard at the early time points. Nevertheless the question
posed by the authors is well defined and the methods are well described. The
data are sound with the above named limitations.
The main findings of the manuscript are the equivalence SVR rates of both
PEG-IFNs in an Asian cohort.
Major Compulsory Revisions:
1. A point of critique is missing data of IL-28B genotype data from the cohort. The
authors discuss the favorable IL-28B genotype in Korea and conclude from this
the well virologic response rates. If possible, maybe with frozen serum samples, I
would recommend to analyze IL28B genotype in a fraction of the treated
population. These data would strengthen the evidence of the manuscript. If it is
not possible because of missing probes this fact should be discussed in the
manuscript.
2. If there are no own IL-28B genotype data, the title of the manuscript is
misleading. I would recommend describing the Korean/Asian population in the
title.
3. Meanwhile the combination therapy with protease inhibitors, PEG-IFN and
Ribavirin is standard in genotype 1 patients. Nevertheless, the backbone of the
therapy is still PEG-IFN, why the conclusion of the manuscript is important. The
protease inhibitors and the role of pegylated interferons (backbone) in the triple
therapy should be discussed in the manuscript.
4. In Table 2 the SVR-rates of genotype 1 have to be corrected (62.2% vs.
64.2%).
5. The small numbers of histology samples, especially in the PEG-IFN alpha-2b
group, should be discussed. Are there any elastometry-data available?
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: Yes, but I do not feel adequately qualified to assess the
statistics.
Reviewer's report
Title:Multicenter Comparison of PEG-IFN 2a or 2b Plus Ribavirin for
Treatment-naive HCV Patient in Favorable IL-28B Polymorphism Dominant Area
Version: 1Date:31 December 2012
Reviewer: Steffen Zopf
Reviewer's report:
Jin and colleagues compared the two different PEG-interferons, alpha-2a and
alpha-2b, in combination with ribavirin in a Korean cohort with chronic hepatitis C
genotype 1 and 2/3. The data were collected in a multicenter trial and analyzed
retrospectively. The authors analyzed data of 661 treatment-naïve patients from
14 sites. This big cohort in a multicenter trial is a major plus factor of the study.
The authors themselves named some of the limitations of the study: The study
has only a retrospective design, the data of dose modifications and AE
monitoring were not strictly controlled and RVR rates were not evaluates for the
whole cohort. The third point is due to the collection date of data from 2000-2008,
where RVR was no standard at the early time points. Nevertheless the question
posed by the authors is well defined and the methods are well described. The
data are sound with the above named limitations.
The main findings of the manuscript are the equivalence SVR rates of both
PEG-IFNs in an Asian cohort.
Major Compulsory Revisions:
1. A point of critique is missing data of IL-28B genotype data from the cohort. The
authors discuss the favorable IL-28B genotype in Korea and conclude from this
the well virologic response rates. If possible, maybe with frozen serum samples, I
would recommend to analyze IL28B genotype in a fraction of the treated
population. These data would strengthen the evidence of the manuscript. If it is
not possible because of missing probes this fact should be discussed in the
manuscript.
2. If there are no own IL-28B genotype data, the title of the manuscript is
misleading. I would recommend describing the Korean/Asian population in the
title.
3. Meanwhile the combination therapy with protease inhibitors, PEG-IFN and
Ribavirin is standard in genotype 1 patients. Nevertheless, the backbone of the
therapy is still PEG-IFN, why the conclusion of the manuscript is important. The
protease inhibitors and the role of pegylated interferons (backbone) in the triple
therapy should be discussed in the manuscript.
4. In Table 2 the SVR-rates of genotype 1 have to be corrected (62.2% vs.
64.2%).
5. The small numbers of histology samples, especially in the PEG-IFN alpha-2b
group, should be discussed. Are there any elastometry-data available?
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: Yes, but I do not feel adequately qualified to assess the
statistics.
Please review this paper.
user
Reviewer's report
Title:Multicenter Comparison of PEG-IFN 2a or 2b Plus Ribavirin for
Treatment-naive HCV Patient in Favorable IL-28B Polymorphism Dominant Area
Version: 1Date:31 December 2012
Reviewer: Steffen Zopf
Reviewer's report:
Jin and colleagues compared the two different PEG-interferons, alpha-2a and
alpha-2b, in combination with ribavirin in a Korean cohort with chronic hepatitis C
genotype 1 and 2/3. The data were collected in a multicenter trial and analyzed
retrospectively. The authors analyzed data of 661 treatment-naïve patients from
14 sites. This big cohort in a multicenter trial is a major plus factor of the study.
The authors themselves named some of the limitations of the study: The study
has only a retrospective design, the data of dose modifications and AE
monitoring were not strictly controlled and RVR rates were not evaluates for the
whole cohort. The third point is due to the collection date of data from 2000-2008,
where RVR was no standard at the early time points. Nevertheless the question
posed by the authors is well defined and the methods are well described. The
data are sound with the above named limitations.
The main findings of the manuscript are the equivalence SVR rates of both
PEG-IFNs in an Asian cohort.
Major Compulsory Revisions:
1. A point of critique is missing data of IL-28B genotype data from the cohort. The
authors discuss the favorable IL-28B genotype in Korea and conclude from this
the well virologic response rates. If possible, maybe with frozen serum samples, I
would recommend to analyze IL28B genotype in a fraction of the treated
population. These data would strengthen the evidence of the manuscript. If it is
not possible because of missing probes this fact should be discussed in the
manuscript.
2. If there are no own IL-28B genotype data, the title of the manuscript is
misleading. I would recommend describing the Korean/Asian population in the
title.
3. Meanwhile the combination therapy with protease inhibitors, PEG-IFN and
Ribavirin is standard in genotype 1 patients. Nevertheless, the backbone of the
therapy is still PEG-IFN, why the conclusion of the manuscript is important. The
protease inhibitors and the role of pegylated interferons (backbone) in the triple
therapy should be discussed in the manuscript.
4. In Table 2 the SVR-rates of genotype 1 have to be corrected (62.2% vs.
64.2%).
5. The small numbers of histology samples, especially in the PEG-IFN alpha-2b
group, should be discussed. Are there any elastometry-data available?
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: Yes, but I do not feel adequately qualified to assess the
statistics.
assistant