Title: Variations in TM6SF2, PCSK9 and PCSK7 genes and risk of hepatic steatosis after liver
transplantation: a cross-sectional study
Version: 10 Date: 23 Aug 2021
Reviewer's report:
Title: Variations in TM6SF2, PCSK9 and PCSK7 genes and risk of hepatic steatosis after liver
transplantation: a cross-sectional study
I appreciate that in the last version of the revised manuscript the authors deleted the statistical
analysis of TT genotype. However, the statistical analysis and presentation must be improved
throughout the paper and authors should advice a biostatician with expertise in analysing
biometric variables.
1. The whole figure 1 is incorrect. Either you should compare Steatosis (+) vs Steatosis (-) with
each variant (+) or (-) and perform Chi Square test or you should compare the percentages of
patients with steatosis depending on the presence or not of the variant and perform t-test or
Mann-Whitney as appropriate. For instance, in the current form of figure 1, in 1B you present
that 2.9% of patients with hepatic steatosis have no hepatic steatosis!. Please revise.
2. Figure 2 should be revised as well. The illustration of data is not appropriate.
3. Non-parametric continuous variables should be presented as median [interquartile range]
rather than mean (SD). Please revise.
4. The authors present the higher prevalence of AG+GG genotypes of PCSK9 rs505151 vs AA
genotype as OR and subsequently illustrate it as 2 graph bars in Figure 2. That is incorrect. You
should compare the afore-mentioned prevalence as numeric variables performing t-test or Mann-
Whitney as appropriate and then you illustrate those results in the Figure. The logistic regression
analysis is generally presented in a Table with ORs, Cis and p-value and not in a figure.
Minor comments:
The authors should carefully read the whole manuscript for grammatical or syntactic errors. (i.e.
page 9, line 7 “steaosis”).
Title: Variations in TM6SF2, PCSK9 and PCSK7 genes and risk of hepatic steatosis after liver
transplantation: a cross-sectional study
Version: 10 Date: 23 Aug 2021
Reviewer's report:
Title: Variations in TM6SF2, PCSK9 and PCSK7 genes and risk of hepatic steatosis after liver
transplantation: a cross-sectional study
I appreciate that in the last version of the revised manuscript the authors deleted the statistical
analysis of TT genotype. However, the statistical analysis and presentation must be improved
throughout the paper and authors should advice a biostatician with expertise in analysing
biometric variables.
1. The whole figure 1 is incorrect. Either you should compare Steatosis (+) vs Steatosis (-) with
each variant (+) or (-) and perform Chi Square test or you should compare the percentages of
patients with steatosis depending on the presence or not of the variant and perform t-test or
Mann-Whitney as appropriate. For instance, in the current form of figure 1, in 1B you present
that 2.9% of patients with hepatic steatosis have no hepatic steatosis!. Please revise.
2. Figure 2 should be revised as well. The illustration of data is not appropriate.
3. Non-parametric continuous variables should be presented as median [interquartile range]
rather than mean (SD). Please revise.
4. The authors present the higher prevalence of AG+GG genotypes of PCSK9 rs505151 vs AA
genotype as OR and subsequently illustrate it as 2 graph bars in Figure 2. That is incorrect. You
should compare the afore-mentioned prevalence as numeric variables performing t-test or Mann-
Whitney as appropriate and then you illustrate those results in the Figure. The logistic regression
analysis is generally presented in a Table with ORs, Cis and p-value and not in a figure.
Minor comments:
The authors should carefully read the whole manuscript for grammatical or syntactic errors. (i.e.
page 9, line 7 “steaosis”).
Please review this paper.
user
Title: Variations in TM6SF2, PCSK9 and PCSK7 genes and risk of hepatic steatosis after liver
transplantation: a cross-sectional study
Version: 10 Date: 23 Aug 2021
Reviewer's report:
Title: Variations in TM6SF2, PCSK9 and PCSK7 genes and risk of hepatic steatosis after liver
transplantation: a cross-sectional study
I appreciate that in the last version of the revised manuscript the authors deleted the statistical
analysis of TT genotype. However, the statistical analysis and presentation must be improved
throughout the paper and authors should advice a biostatician with expertise in analysing
biometric variables.
1. The whole figure 1 is incorrect. Either you should compare Steatosis (+) vs Steatosis (-) with
each variant (+) or (-) and perform Chi Square test or you should compare the percentages of
patients with steatosis depending on the presence or not of the variant and perform t-test or
Mann-Whitney as appropriate. For instance, in the current form of figure 1, in 1B you present
that 2.9% of patients with hepatic steatosis have no hepatic steatosis!. Please revise.
2. Figure 2 should be revised as well. The illustration of data is not appropriate.
3. Non-parametric continuous variables should be presented as median [interquartile range]
rather than mean (SD). Please revise.
4. The authors present the higher prevalence of AG+GG genotypes of PCSK9 rs505151 vs AA
genotype as OR and subsequently illustrate it as 2 graph bars in Figure 2. That is incorrect. You
should compare the afore-mentioned prevalence as numeric variables performing t-test or Mann-
Whitney as appropriate and then you illustrate those results in the Figure. The logistic regression
analysis is generally presented in a Table with ORs, Cis and p-value and not in a figure.
Minor comments:
The authors should carefully read the whole manuscript for grammatical or syntactic errors. (i.e.
page 9, line 7 “steaosis”).
assistant