Reviewer ’s report  
 
Title: SSH1 expression is associated with gastric cancer progression and predicts a poor 
prognosis  
 
Version: 0 Date: 11 Jun 2017  
 
Reviewer: Marco Petrillo  
 
Reviewer's report:  
 
The paper by Maimaiti et al. evaluates the prognostic role of SSH1 in a series of patients with 
gastric cancer. The originality and scientific relevance of the presented study seems adequate; 
however, some criticisms have to be raised:   
 
General points:  
a) The main study limitation is represented by the unclear design. Did the authors included a 
consecutive series o f patients? Is the study characterized by a selection bias? The authors 
must clarify this crucial point. If the study is a retrospective consecutive evaluation the 
authors must specify the inclusion criteria used to identify the final study population. 
Finally, in the discussion section it must be clearly stated that the study nature is a relevant 
bias and the reliability of must be confirmed in prospective series.  
b) The authors provide an interesting hypothesis generating study. This means that the author s 
should re -consider the discussion section trying to highlight how the presented results may 
be of help in routine clinical practice. In particular: what about adjuvant treatments? No data 
have been presented regarding the percentage, and type of post -operative treatments 
administered. Furthermore, these data have not been included in univariate/multivariate 
analysis. Please, reconsider these aspects in data analysis.     
c) It would be very interesting to know whether SSH1 prognostic role is maintained bo th in 
Stage I -II and Stage III -IV.  
d) As above mentioned, a detailed discussion regarding molecular pathways involved in SSH1 
cancer development process is not required. We strongly recommend to give a more clinical 
point of view to the discussion section .  
Specific points:  
- First sentence: gastric cancer IS NOT the most common type of malignancy worldwide. 
Furthermore, I read carefully the manuscript by Chen W et al. [1], and stomach cancer is the 
second most common type of cancer after lung in China, and  in no way Chen et al. have 
suggested in the manuscript that gastric cancer is the most common malignancy worldwide. 
If the authors use a citation, the corresponding statement must reflect the reference results. 
Please, correct.    
- English language should  be improved.  
Are the methods appropriate and well described?  
If not, please specify what  is required in your comments to the authors.  
 
No 
 
Does the work include the necessary controls?  
If not, please specify which controls are required in your comments to the authors.  
 
Yes 
 
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 manuscript or would you recommend an  
additional statistical review?  
If an additional statistical review is recommended, please specify what aspects require further  
assessment in your comments to the editors.  
 
I am able to assess the statistics  
 
Quality of written English  
Please indicate the quality of language in the manuscr ipt: 
 
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, fees, fund ing, or salary from an  
organisation that may in any way gain or lose financially from the publication of this  
manuscript, either now or in the future?  
 
2. Do you hold any stocks or shares in an organisation that may in any way gain or lose  
financially from the publication of this manuscript, either now or in the 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, w rite '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 understand that my name will be include d 
on my report to the authors and, if the manuscript is accepted for 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 A ccess 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 included 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: SSH1 expression is associated with gastric cancer progression and predicts a poor 
prognosis  
 
Version: 0 Date: 11 Jun 2017  
 
Reviewer: Marco Petrillo  
 
Reviewer's report:  
 
The paper by Maimaiti et al. evaluates the prognostic role of SSH1 in a series of patients with 
gastric cancer. The originality and scientific relevance of the presented study seems adequate; 
however, some criticisms have to be raised:   
 
General points:  
a) The main study limitation is represented by the unclear design. Did the authors included a 
consecutive series o f patients? Is the study characterized by a selection bias? The authors 
must clarify this crucial point. If the study is a retrospective consecutive evaluation the 
authors must specify the inclusion criteria used to identify the final study population. 
Finally, in the discussion section it must be clearly stated that the study nature is a relevant 
bias and the reliability of must be confirmed in prospective series.  
b) The authors provide an interesting hypothesis generating study. This means that the author s 
should re -consider the discussion section trying to highlight how the presented results may 
be of help in routine clinical practice. In particular: what about adjuvant treatments? No data 
have been presented regarding the percentage, and type of post -operative treatments 
administered. Furthermore, these data have not been included in univariate/multivariate 
analysis. Please, reconsider these aspects in data analysis.     
c) It would be very interesting to know whether SSH1 prognostic role is maintained bo th in 
Stage I -II and Stage III -IV.  
d) As above mentioned, a detailed discussion regarding molecular pathways involved in SSH1 
cancer development process is not required. We strongly recommend to give a more clinical 
point of view to the discussion section .  
Specific points:  
- First sentence: gastric cancer IS NOT the most common type of malignancy worldwide. 
Furthermore, I read carefully the manuscript by Chen W et al. [1], and stomach cancer is the 
second most common type of cancer after lung in China, and  in no way Chen et al. have 
suggested in the manuscript that gastric cancer is the most common malignancy worldwide. 
If the authors use a citation, the corresponding statement must reflect the reference results. 
Please, correct.    
- English language should  be improved.  
Are the methods appropriate and well described?  
If not, please specify what  is required in your comments to the authors.  
 
No 
 
Does the work include the necessary controls?  
If not, please specify which controls are required in your comments to the authors.  
 
Yes 
 
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 manuscript or would you recommend an  
additional statistical review?  
If an additional statistical review is recommended, please specify what aspects require further  
assessment in your comments to the editors.  
 
I am able to assess the statistics  
 
Quality of written English  
Please indicate the quality of language in the manuscr ipt: 
 
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, fees, fund ing, or salary from an  
organisation that may in any way gain or lose financially from the publication of this  
manuscript, either now or in the future?  
 
2. Do you hold any stocks or shares in an organisation that may in any way gain or lose  
financially from the publication of this manuscript, either now or in the 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, w rite '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 understand that my name will be include d 
on my report to the authors and, if the manuscript is accepted for 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 A ccess 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 included 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: SSH1 expression is associated with gastric cancer progression and predicts a poor 
prognosis  
 
Version: 0 Date: 11 Jun 2017  
 
Reviewer: Marco Petrillo  
 
Reviewer's report:  
 
The paper by Maimaiti et al. evaluates the prognostic role of SSH1 in a series of patients with 
gastric cancer. The originality and scientific relevance of the presented study seems adequate; 
however, some criticisms have to be raised:   
 
General points:  
a) The main study limitation is represented by the unclear design. Did the authors included a 
consecutive series o f patients? Is the study characterized by a selection bias? The authors 
must clarify this crucial point. If the study is a retrospective consecutive evaluation the 
authors must specify the inclusion criteria used to identify the final study population. 
Finally, in the discussion section it must be clearly stated that the study nature is a relevant 
bias and the reliability of must be confirmed in prospective series.  
b) The authors provide an interesting hypothesis generating study. This means that the author s 
should re -consider the discussion section trying to highlight how the presented results may 
be of help in routine clinical practice. In particular: what about adjuvant treatments? No data 
have been presented regarding the percentage, and type of post -operative treatments 
administered. Furthermore, these data have not been included in univariate/multivariate 
analysis. Please, reconsider these aspects in data analysis.     
c) It would be very interesting to know whether SSH1 prognostic role is maintained bo th in 
Stage I -II and Stage III -IV.  
d) As above mentioned, a detailed discussion regarding molecular pathways involved in SSH1 
cancer development process is not required. We strongly recommend to give a more clinical 
point of view to the discussion section .  
Specific points:  
- First sentence: gastric cancer IS NOT the most common type of malignancy worldwide. 
Furthermore, I read carefully the manuscript by Chen W et al. [1], and stomach cancer is the 
second most common type of cancer after lung in China, and  in no way Chen et al. have 
suggested in the manuscript that gastric cancer is the most common malignancy worldwide. 
If the authors use a citation, the corresponding statement must reflect the reference results. 
Please, correct.    
- English language should  be improved.  
Are the methods appropriate and well described?  
If not, please specify what  is required in your comments to the authors.  
 
No 
 
Does the work include the necessary controls?  
If not, please specify which controls are required in your comments to the authors.  
 
Yes 
 
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 manuscript or would you recommend an  
additional statistical review?  
If an additional statistical review is recommended, please specify what aspects require further  
assessment in your comments to the editors.  
 
I am able to assess the statistics  
 
Quality of written English  
Please indicate the quality of language in the manuscr ipt: 
 
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, fees, fund ing, or salary from an  
organisation that may in any way gain or lose financially from the publication of this  
manuscript, either now or in the future?  
 
2. Do you hold any stocks or shares in an organisation that may in any way gain or lose  
financially from the publication of this manuscript, either now or in the 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, w rite '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 understand that my name will be include d 
on my report to the authors and, if the manuscript is accepted for 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 A ccess 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 included as confidential comments  
to the editors, which will not be published.  
 
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal  
assistant