Reviewer's report 
 Long-term culture of cholangiocytes from liver fibro-granulomatous lesions Title: 
 2  9 December 2005 Version: Date: 
 STUART FORBES Reviewer: 
Reviewer's report: 
General 
This is a well performed study looking at the generation of cells with a cholangiocyte phenotype. It is 
of interest to those studying biliary epithelial biology and may indicate a future technique of broad 
applicability. 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Major Compulsory Revisions (that the author must respond to before a decision on publication can 
be reached) We should see a photomicrograph of the typical lesions that develop in the model at the timepoints 
mentioned. 
We need to see controls for the immunofuorescent immunocharacterisation (ie no antibody negative control and a positive control) 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Minor Essential Revisions (such as missing labels on figures, or the wrong use of a term, which the 
author can be trusted to correct) 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Discretionary Revisions (which the author can choose to ignore) 
Im not sure why in the discussion the authors think that expression of CK 18 and 19 rules out an undifferentiated of oval cell phenotype. 
Have monoclonal cell cultures been produced (from a single cell)? 
 Unable to decide on acceptance or rejection until the authors have responded to the What next?: 
major compulsory revisions 
 An article whose findings are important to those with closely related research Level of interest: 
interests 
 Acceptable Quality of written English: 
 No Statistical review: 
Declaration of competing interests: 
I declare that I have no competing interests 
Reviewer's report 
 Long-term culture of cholangiocytes from liver fibro-granulomatous lesions Title: 
 2  9 December 2005 Version: Date: 
 STUART FORBES Reviewer: 
Reviewer's report: 
General 
This is a well performed study looking at the generation of cells with a cholangiocyte phenotype. It is 
of interest to those studying biliary epithelial biology and may indicate a future technique of broad 
applicability. 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Major Compulsory Revisions (that the author must respond to before a decision on publication can 
be reached) We should see a photomicrograph of the typical lesions that develop in the model at the timepoints 
mentioned. 
We need to see controls for the immunofuorescent immunocharacterisation (ie no antibody negative control and a positive control) 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Minor Essential Revisions (such as missing labels on figures, or the wrong use of a term, which the 
author can be trusted to correct) 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Discretionary Revisions (which the author can choose to ignore) 
Im not sure why in the discussion the authors think that expression of CK 18 and 19 rules out an undifferentiated of oval cell phenotype. 
Have monoclonal cell cultures been produced (from a single cell)? 
 Unable to decide on acceptance or rejection until the authors have responded to the What next?: 
major compulsory revisions 
 An article whose findings are important to those with closely related research Level of interest: 
interests 
 Acceptable Quality of written English: 
 No Statistical review: 
Declaration of competing interests: 
I declare that I have no competing interests 
Please review this paper.
user
Reviewer's report 
 Long-term culture of cholangiocytes from liver fibro-granulomatous lesions Title: 
 2  9 December 2005 Version: Date: 
 STUART FORBES Reviewer: 
Reviewer's report: 
General 
This is a well performed study looking at the generation of cells with a cholangiocyte phenotype. It is 
of interest to those studying biliary epithelial biology and may indicate a future technique of broad 
applicability. 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Major Compulsory Revisions (that the author must respond to before a decision on publication can 
be reached) We should see a photomicrograph of the typical lesions that develop in the model at the timepoints 
mentioned. 
We need to see controls for the immunofuorescent immunocharacterisation (ie no antibody negative control and a positive control) 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Minor Essential Revisions (such as missing labels on figures, or the wrong use of a term, which the 
author can be trusted to correct) 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Discretionary Revisions (which the author can choose to ignore) 
Im not sure why in the discussion the authors think that expression of CK 18 and 19 rules out an undifferentiated of oval cell phenotype. 
Have monoclonal cell cultures been produced (from a single cell)? 
 Unable to decide on acceptance or rejection until the authors have responded to the What next?: 
major compulsory revisions 
 An article whose findings are important to those with closely related research Level of interest: 
interests 
 Acceptable Quality of written English: 
 No Statistical review: 
Declaration of competing interests: 
I declare that I have no competing interests 
assistant