Reviewer ’s report  
 
Title: Relationship between mucosal healing by tacrolimus and r elapse of refractory ulcerative 
colitis: A retrospective study  
 
Version: 1 Date: 26 Dec 2019  
 
Reviewer: Lorenzo Bertani  
 
Reviewer's report:  
 
I read the manuscript entitled "Relationship b etween mucosal healing by tacrolimus and relapse 
of refractory ulcerative colitis: A retrospective study" with a lot of interest. Although mucosal 
healing is well recognized as the main goal to reach for ulcerative colitis treatment, all  the 
findings aime d to demonstrate its importance are appreciated.  
 
However, this study could be improved, especially increasing the discussion section, which is not 
particularly detailed:  
 
1) One of the most important parameter in defining baseline characteristics of ulcerat ive colitis 
patients is the need of corticosteroid treatment at diagnosis. In my opinion, authors could 
evaluate this parameter with regard their analysis on clinical characteristics before treatment. 
Moreover, this should be discussed in the discussion se ction (i.e. Khan et al, APT, 2014; 
Safroneeva et al., APT, 2015, Bertani et al., Dig Dis Sci, 2019)  
 
2) Fecal calprotectin is the most widely used biomarker in ulcerative colitis setting. In my 
opinion, an analysis of the levels of this biomarker should be performed, at least at the time of 
endoscopic evaluation. An evaluation during follow up could improve significantly this study. 
However, even if data during follow up would not be available, a discussion about this 
biomarker is needed in the discussion se ction, including the most recent references (i.e. Ryu et 
al, Medicine, 2019, Li et al, Mediators Inflamm, 2019, Mumolo et al. WJG, 2018)  
 
 
Minor revisions are also required:  
 
1) Clarify if all the included patients have a follow -up reaching 1000 days. If no t, define the 
percentage of patients with regard of the four groups of follow -up. 
 
2) An English native -speaker revision would make the text -reading more fluent  
 
3) There are some typing errors (i.e. page 7, line 4; page 12, line 20) and abbreviations should  be 
checked  
 
Are the methods appropriate and well described?  
If not, please specify what is required in your comments to the authors.  
 
Yes 
 
Does the work include the necessary c ontrols?  
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 manus cript or would you recommend an 
additional statistical review?  
If an additional statistical review is recommended, please speci fy 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:  
 
Needs some language corrections before being published  
 
Declaration of competing interests  
Please complete a declaration of competing inter ests, 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 financial ly from the 
publication of this 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 manuscrip t, either now or in the 
future?  
 
3.  Do y ou hold or are you currently applying for any patents relating to the c ontent 
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 com peting interests  
 
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 f or publication, 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 Op en Access Creative Commons 
CC-BY license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ). I understand t hat 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  
Reviewer ’s report  
 
Title: Relationship between mucosal healing by tacrolimus and r elapse of refractory ulcerative 
colitis: A retrospective study  
 
Version: 1 Date: 26 Dec 2019  
 
Reviewer: Lorenzo Bertani  
 
Reviewer's report:  
 
I read the manuscript entitled "Relationship b etween mucosal healing by tacrolimus and relapse 
of refractory ulcerative colitis: A retrospective study" with a lot of interest. Although mucosal 
healing is well recognized as the main goal to reach for ulcerative colitis treatment, all  the 
findings aime d to demonstrate its importance are appreciated.  
 
However, this study could be improved, especially increasing the discussion section, which is not 
particularly detailed:  
 
1) One of the most important parameter in defining baseline characteristics of ulcerat ive colitis 
patients is the need of corticosteroid treatment at diagnosis. In my opinion, authors could 
evaluate this parameter with regard their analysis on clinical characteristics before treatment. 
Moreover, this should be discussed in the discussion se ction (i.e. Khan et al, APT, 2014; 
Safroneeva et al., APT, 2015, Bertani et al., Dig Dis Sci, 2019)  
 
2) Fecal calprotectin is the most widely used biomarker in ulcerative colitis setting. In my 
opinion, an analysis of the levels of this biomarker should be performed, at least at the time of 
endoscopic evaluation. An evaluation during follow up could improve significantly this study. 
However, even if data during follow up would not be available, a discussion about this 
biomarker is needed in the discussion se ction, including the most recent references (i.e. Ryu et 
al, Medicine, 2019, Li et al, Mediators Inflamm, 2019, Mumolo et al. WJG, 2018)  
 
 
Minor revisions are also required:  
 
1) Clarify if all the included patients have a follow -up reaching 1000 days. If no t, define the 
percentage of patients with regard of the four groups of follow -up. 
 
2) An English native -speaker revision would make the text -reading more fluent  
 
3) There are some typing errors (i.e. page 7, line 4; page 12, line 20) and abbreviations should  be 
checked  
 
Are the methods appropriate and well described?  
If not, please specify what is required in your comments to the authors.  
 
Yes 
 
Does the work include the necessary c ontrols?  
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 manus cript or would you recommend an 
additional statistical review?  
If an additional statistical review is recommended, please speci fy 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:  
 
Needs some language corrections before being published  
 
Declaration of competing interests  
Please complete a declaration of competing inter ests, 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 financial ly from the 
publication of this 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 manuscrip t, either now or in the 
future?  
 
3.  Do y ou hold or are you currently applying for any patents relating to the c ontent 
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 com peting interests  
 
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 f or publication, 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 Op en Access Creative Commons 
CC-BY license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ). I understand t hat 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  
Please review this paper.
user
Reviewer ’s report  
 
Title: Relationship between mucosal healing by tacrolimus and r elapse of refractory ulcerative 
colitis: A retrospective study  
 
Version: 1 Date: 26 Dec 2019  
 
Reviewer: Lorenzo Bertani  
 
Reviewer's report:  
 
I read the manuscript entitled "Relationship b etween mucosal healing by tacrolimus and relapse 
of refractory ulcerative colitis: A retrospective study" with a lot of interest. Although mucosal 
healing is well recognized as the main goal to reach for ulcerative colitis treatment, all  the 
findings aime d to demonstrate its importance are appreciated.  
 
However, this study could be improved, especially increasing the discussion section, which is not 
particularly detailed:  
 
1) One of the most important parameter in defining baseline characteristics of ulcerat ive colitis 
patients is the need of corticosteroid treatment at diagnosis. In my opinion, authors could 
evaluate this parameter with regard their analysis on clinical characteristics before treatment. 
Moreover, this should be discussed in the discussion se ction (i.e. Khan et al, APT, 2014; 
Safroneeva et al., APT, 2015, Bertani et al., Dig Dis Sci, 2019)  
 
2) Fecal calprotectin is the most widely used biomarker in ulcerative colitis setting. In my 
opinion, an analysis of the levels of this biomarker should be performed, at least at the time of 
endoscopic evaluation. An evaluation during follow up could improve significantly this study. 
However, even if data during follow up would not be available, a discussion about this 
biomarker is needed in the discussion se ction, including the most recent references (i.e. Ryu et 
al, Medicine, 2019, Li et al, Mediators Inflamm, 2019, Mumolo et al. WJG, 2018)  
 
 
Minor revisions are also required:  
 
1) Clarify if all the included patients have a follow -up reaching 1000 days. If no t, define the 
percentage of patients with regard of the four groups of follow -up. 
 
2) An English native -speaker revision would make the text -reading more fluent  
 
3) There are some typing errors (i.e. page 7, line 4; page 12, line 20) and abbreviations should  be 
checked  
 
Are the methods appropriate and well described?  
If not, please specify what is required in your comments to the authors.  
 
Yes 
 
Does the work include the necessary c ontrols?  
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 manus cript or would you recommend an 
additional statistical review?  
If an additional statistical review is recommended, please speci fy 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:  
 
Needs some language corrections before being published  
 
Declaration of competing interests  
Please complete a declaration of competing inter ests, 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 financial ly from the 
publication of this 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 manuscrip t, either now or in the 
future?  
 
3.  Do y ou hold or are you currently applying for any patents relating to the c ontent 
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 com peting interests  
 
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 f or publication, 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 Op en Access Creative Commons 
CC-BY license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ). I understand t hat 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  
assistant