Reviewer's report
Title:Risk of De Novo Post-Transplant Type 2 Diabetes in Patients Undergoing
Liver Transplant for Non-Alcoholic Steatohepatitis
Version:2Date:9 August 2015
Reviewer: Kalyan Bhamidimarri
Reviewer's report:
Major:
1) I think there is an unintentional inclusion of HCV related transplants due to
inclusion of primary liver malignancy (27.5%). It is known that a significant
proportion of the HCC patients are probably due to HCV and thus the control
group might not truly represent non HCV controls. This would skew the
calculations and would need to be adjusted.
Rahimi RS, Trotter JF. Liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma:
outcomes and treatment options for recurrence. Annals of gastro 2015.
2) The authors themselves published recently regarding certain donor
characteristics: donor age, donor h/o DM, DCD to have a significant impact on
PTDM (p< 0.0001) in the recipient. The authors include DCD risk in table 2 but it
would be pertinent to include the adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) of donor age and
donor h/o DM for PTDM in this paper as well.
Younossi ZM et al; The impact of type 2 diabetes and obesity on the long-term
outcomes of more than 85 000 liver transplant recipients in the US. Aliment
pharmacol ther 2014.
Minor:
Line 51, 53, 54: Need to rephrase that the etiology is cryptogenic cirrhosis (it can
be clarified later that a majority of them are most likely related to NASH).
Line 56: clarify the sentence “atleast one onset of de novo diabetes”. Do the
authors mean one episode of hyperglycemia?
Line 58: How was diabetes diagnosed? Was ADA criteria used to diagnose DM?
Please use diabetes mellitus or DM or PTDM consistently through out the paper.
Line 107: simplify the sentence.
Line 289: epidemic
Table 2: 2nd group is controls not ALD. Please correct
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.
Reviewer's report
Title:Risk of De Novo Post-Transplant Type 2 Diabetes in Patients Undergoing
Liver Transplant for Non-Alcoholic Steatohepatitis
Version:2Date:9 August 2015
Reviewer: Kalyan Bhamidimarri
Reviewer's report:
Major:
1) I think there is an unintentional inclusion of HCV related transplants due to
inclusion of primary liver malignancy (27.5%). It is known that a significant
proportion of the HCC patients are probably due to HCV and thus the control
group might not truly represent non HCV controls. This would skew the
calculations and would need to be adjusted.
Rahimi RS, Trotter JF. Liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma:
outcomes and treatment options for recurrence. Annals of gastro 2015.
2) The authors themselves published recently regarding certain donor
characteristics: donor age, donor h/o DM, DCD to have a significant impact on
PTDM (p< 0.0001) in the recipient. The authors include DCD risk in table 2 but it
would be pertinent to include the adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) of donor age and
donor h/o DM for PTDM in this paper as well.
Younossi ZM et al; The impact of type 2 diabetes and obesity on the long-term
outcomes of more than 85 000 liver transplant recipients in the US. Aliment
pharmacol ther 2014.
Minor:
Line 51, 53, 54: Need to rephrase that the etiology is cryptogenic cirrhosis (it can
be clarified later that a majority of them are most likely related to NASH).
Line 56: clarify the sentence “atleast one onset of de novo diabetes”. Do the
authors mean one episode of hyperglycemia?
Line 58: How was diabetes diagnosed? Was ADA criteria used to diagnose DM?
Please use diabetes mellitus or DM or PTDM consistently through out the paper.
Line 107: simplify the sentence.
Line 289: epidemic
Table 2: 2nd group is controls not ALD. Please correct
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.
Please review this paper.
user
Reviewer's report
Title:Risk of De Novo Post-Transplant Type 2 Diabetes in Patients Undergoing
Liver Transplant for Non-Alcoholic Steatohepatitis
Version:2Date:9 August 2015
Reviewer: Kalyan Bhamidimarri
Reviewer's report:
Major:
1) I think there is an unintentional inclusion of HCV related transplants due to
inclusion of primary liver malignancy (27.5%). It is known that a significant
proportion of the HCC patients are probably due to HCV and thus the control
group might not truly represent non HCV controls. This would skew the
calculations and would need to be adjusted.
Rahimi RS, Trotter JF. Liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma:
outcomes and treatment options for recurrence. Annals of gastro 2015.
2) The authors themselves published recently regarding certain donor
characteristics: donor age, donor h/o DM, DCD to have a significant impact on
PTDM (p< 0.0001) in the recipient. The authors include DCD risk in table 2 but it
would be pertinent to include the adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) of donor age and
donor h/o DM for PTDM in this paper as well.
Younossi ZM et al; The impact of type 2 diabetes and obesity on the long-term
outcomes of more than 85 000 liver transplant recipients in the US. Aliment
pharmacol ther 2014.
Minor:
Line 51, 53, 54: Need to rephrase that the etiology is cryptogenic cirrhosis (it can
be clarified later that a majority of them are most likely related to NASH).
Line 56: clarify the sentence “atleast one onset of de novo diabetes”. Do the
authors mean one episode of hyperglycemia?
Line 58: How was diabetes diagnosed? Was ADA criteria used to diagnose DM?
Please use diabetes mellitus or DM or PTDM consistently through out the paper.
Line 107: simplify the sentence.
Line 289: epidemic
Table 2: 2nd group is controls not ALD. Please correct
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.
assistant