Reviewer ’s report  
 
Title: Gastric schwannoma with giant ulcer and lymphadenopathy mimicking gastric cancer: a 
case report  
 
Version: 1 Date: 23 Jan 2020  
 
Reviewer: Arvind Ahuja  
 
Reviewer's report:  
 
Tang et al report a case of gastric schwannoma , which in conjunction with multiple enlarged 
regional lymph nodes mimicked gastric cancer clinically. They have emphasized and discussed 
the role of FDG PET/CT in schwannoma.  
 
 
I have following comments/queries from the authors:  
 
1. Title of manuscript i s not justified as FDG PET/CT imaging did not showed uptake in the 
enlarged lymph node , moreover 18F -FDG PET/CT  was not diagnostic of schwannoma, 
therefore 18 F -FDG PET/CT may be deleted.  
 
2. English language is not upto the mark. For example Page 4 lin e 15 and 17 ," It was 
sallow, tough and grown deep into the muscular layer", what do you mean?  
 
3. Page 6 line 5, Schwancytoma is old terminology please delete it.  
 
4. Page 6 line 54, delete 'with'.  
 
5. "Yapet  al. [9] reported a case of GS confirmed by pathology, which was occasionally  
found in a non -Hodgkin's lymphoma patient.18F -FDG PET/CT was performed before  
and after treatment for non -Hodgkin's lymphoma, showing increased uptake of 18FFDG  
in the gastric le sion (SUVmax 4.9)." I don't understand this sentence, please explain.  
 
6. Differential diagnosis mentioned in discussion page 6 para 2 and page 8 para1 may be 
clubbed together.  
 
7. As FDG PET/CT imaging prior to surgery did not showed uptake in the enlarg ed lymph 
node, the possibility of lymph node metastasis is less likely. Why repeat deeper biopsy or 
endoscopic USG guided FNAC was not performed to rule out non -epithelial or benign 
lesions.  
 
 
Thanks  
 
 
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 controls?  
If not, please specify which controls are required in your comments to the authors.  
 
No 
 
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 specify what aspects requ ire further 
assessment in your comments to the editors.  
 
Not relevant to this manuscript  
 
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 interests, 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 financially from t he 
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 manuscript, either now or in t he 
future?  
 
3.  Do you hold or are you currently applying for any patents  relating to the content 
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 competing 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 au thors 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 Open Access Creative Commons 
CC-BY license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ). I understand that 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: Gastric schwannoma with giant ulcer and lymphadenopathy mimicking gastric cancer: a 
case report  
 
Version: 1 Date: 23 Jan 2020  
 
Reviewer: Arvind Ahuja  
 
Reviewer's report:  
 
Tang et al report a case of gastric schwannoma , which in conjunction with multiple enlarged 
regional lymph nodes mimicked gastric cancer clinically. They have emphasized and discussed 
the role of FDG PET/CT in schwannoma.  
 
 
I have following comments/queries from the authors:  
 
1. Title of manuscript i s not justified as FDG PET/CT imaging did not showed uptake in the 
enlarged lymph node , moreover 18F -FDG PET/CT  was not diagnostic of schwannoma, 
therefore 18 F -FDG PET/CT may be deleted.  
 
2. English language is not upto the mark. For example Page 4 lin e 15 and 17 ," It was 
sallow, tough and grown deep into the muscular layer", what do you mean?  
 
3. Page 6 line 5, Schwancytoma is old terminology please delete it.  
 
4. Page 6 line 54, delete 'with'.  
 
5. "Yapet  al. [9] reported a case of GS confirmed by pathology, which was occasionally  
found in a non -Hodgkin's lymphoma patient.18F -FDG PET/CT was performed before  
and after treatment for non -Hodgkin's lymphoma, showing increased uptake of 18FFDG  
in the gastric le sion (SUVmax 4.9)." I don't understand this sentence, please explain.  
 
6. Differential diagnosis mentioned in discussion page 6 para 2 and page 8 para1 may be 
clubbed together.  
 
7. As FDG PET/CT imaging prior to surgery did not showed uptake in the enlarg ed lymph 
node, the possibility of lymph node metastasis is less likely. Why repeat deeper biopsy or 
endoscopic USG guided FNAC was not performed to rule out non -epithelial or benign 
lesions.  
 
 
Thanks  
 
 
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 controls?  
If not, please specify which controls are required in your comments to the authors.  
 
No 
 
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 specify what aspects requ ire further 
assessment in your comments to the editors.  
 
Not relevant to this manuscript  
 
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 interests, 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 financially from t he 
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 manuscript, either now or in t he 
future?  
 
3.  Do you hold or are you currently applying for any patents  relating to the content 
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 competing 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 au thors 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 Open Access Creative Commons 
CC-BY license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ). I understand that 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: Gastric schwannoma with giant ulcer and lymphadenopathy mimicking gastric cancer: a 
case report  
 
Version: 1 Date: 23 Jan 2020  
 
Reviewer: Arvind Ahuja  
 
Reviewer's report:  
 
Tang et al report a case of gastric schwannoma , which in conjunction with multiple enlarged 
regional lymph nodes mimicked gastric cancer clinically. They have emphasized and discussed 
the role of FDG PET/CT in schwannoma.  
 
 
I have following comments/queries from the authors:  
 
1. Title of manuscript i s not justified as FDG PET/CT imaging did not showed uptake in the 
enlarged lymph node , moreover 18F -FDG PET/CT  was not diagnostic of schwannoma, 
therefore 18 F -FDG PET/CT may be deleted.  
 
2. English language is not upto the mark. For example Page 4 lin e 15 and 17 ," It was 
sallow, tough and grown deep into the muscular layer", what do you mean?  
 
3. Page 6 line 5, Schwancytoma is old terminology please delete it.  
 
4. Page 6 line 54, delete 'with'.  
 
5. "Yapet  al. [9] reported a case of GS confirmed by pathology, which was occasionally  
found in a non -Hodgkin's lymphoma patient.18F -FDG PET/CT was performed before  
and after treatment for non -Hodgkin's lymphoma, showing increased uptake of 18FFDG  
in the gastric le sion (SUVmax 4.9)." I don't understand this sentence, please explain.  
 
6. Differential diagnosis mentioned in discussion page 6 para 2 and page 8 para1 may be 
clubbed together.  
 
7. As FDG PET/CT imaging prior to surgery did not showed uptake in the enlarg ed lymph 
node, the possibility of lymph node metastasis is less likely. Why repeat deeper biopsy or 
endoscopic USG guided FNAC was not performed to rule out non -epithelial or benign 
lesions.  
 
 
Thanks  
 
 
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 controls?  
If not, please specify which controls are required in your comments to the authors.  
 
No 
 
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 specify what aspects requ ire further 
assessment in your comments to the editors.  
 
Not relevant to this manuscript  
 
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 interests, 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 financially from t he 
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 manuscript, either now or in t he 
future?  
 
3.  Do you hold or are you currently applying for any patents  relating to the content 
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 competing 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 au thors 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 Open Access Creative Commons 
CC-BY license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ). I understand that 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