Reviewer's report
Title:Laparoscopic and open resection for colorectal cancer: an evaluation of
cellular immunity
Version: 3Date:15 September 2010
Reviewer: Simon Ng
Reviewer's report:
The authors have attempted to address my previous concerns and clarified the
differences regarding the observed cellular immune responses between their
manuscript and previous published studies. I agree with them that their better
results may reflect progress of laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery nowadays
in China.
Minor Essential Revisions:
In their cover letter, the authors have indicated that 5 patients with complications
were excluded from the study, and the authors have explained the rationale
behind. I think they should include these information and data in the results
section. This will allow the readers to have a better understanding of the overall
picture, especially when the authors are still trying to compare the short-term
clinical outcome data between the laparoscopic and open surgery groups.
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a
statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests.
Reviewer's report
Title:Laparoscopic and open resection for colorectal cancer: an evaluation of
cellular immunity
Version: 3Date:15 September 2010
Reviewer: Simon Ng
Reviewer's report:
The authors have attempted to address my previous concerns and clarified the
differences regarding the observed cellular immune responses between their
manuscript and previous published studies. I agree with them that their better
results may reflect progress of laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery nowadays
in China.
Minor Essential Revisions:
In their cover letter, the authors have indicated that 5 patients with complications
were excluded from the study, and the authors have explained the rationale
behind. I think they should include these information and data in the results
section. This will allow the readers to have a better understanding of the overall
picture, especially when the authors are still trying to compare the short-term
clinical outcome data between the laparoscopic and open surgery groups.
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a
statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests.
Please review this paper.
user
Reviewer's report
Title:Laparoscopic and open resection for colorectal cancer: an evaluation of
cellular immunity
Version: 3Date:15 September 2010
Reviewer: Simon Ng
Reviewer's report:
The authors have attempted to address my previous concerns and clarified the
differences regarding the observed cellular immune responses between their
manuscript and previous published studies. I agree with them that their better
results may reflect progress of laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery nowadays
in China.
Minor Essential Revisions:
In their cover letter, the authors have indicated that 5 patients with complications
were excluded from the study, and the authors have explained the rationale
behind. I think they should include these information and data in the results
section. This will allow the readers to have a better understanding of the overall
picture, especially when the authors are still trying to compare the short-term
clinical outcome data between the laparoscopic and open surgery groups.
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a
statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests.
assistant