Reviewer's report 
 Surgical treatment and prognostic analysis for gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) of the small Title: 
intestine: Before the era of Imatinib Mesylate 
 1  8 May 2006 Version: Date: 
 Jonathan Trent Reviewer: 
Reviewer's report: 
General 
This manuscript describes the outcomes of patients with small intestine GISTs treated prior to imatinib. It is of historical interest but has been 
described in prior publications (DeMatteo et al, Ng et al) There are 
several notable findings that diverge from other publications. Interestingly, tumor size was not a prognostic factor in multivariate analysis. This should be explained by the authors if this article is to 
be published. 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Major Compulsory Revisions (that the author must respond to before a decision on publication can be 
reached) 
1. Paragraph 1, line 7: Please provide reference - (uncontrolled anti-apoptotic effect) 
2. Needs extensive grammatical editing throughout the manuscript. 
3. Paragraph 2, line 1: Surgical resection is the mainstay of treatment 
for "primary" GIST, not all GISTs. Imatinib is the treatment for 
metastatic GIST. Rephrase ?"for primary GISTS" 
Results 
Clinical characteristics: 
4. Paragraph 2: Any evidence of a familial pattern of GIST in this 
patient with multiple small intestine lesions? 
5. Paragraph 2, line 4: 
"Panendoscopy" ? please define 
Treatments and Outcomes 
6. Paragraph 2, line 1: 
Please define"Curative resection" here & subsequently. Do the authors mean complete resection? 
Discussion 
7. Why is tumor size not an independent predictor of OS/OFS by 
multivariate analysis? Please comment on a possible explanation. 
Table 2 
8. Please comment on the interesting trends toward a difference in 
DFS/OS by Gender, Operation time and Tumor size. 
Table 5 
10. Please comment on why the author's finding that tumor size does not 
impact OS/DSF. 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
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) 
Reviewer's report 
 Surgical treatment and prognostic analysis for gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) of the small Title: 
intestine: Before the era of Imatinib Mesylate 
 1  8 May 2006 Version: Date: 
 Jonathan Trent Reviewer: 
Reviewer's report: 
General 
This manuscript describes the outcomes of patients with small intestine GISTs treated prior to imatinib. It is of historical interest but has been 
described in prior publications (DeMatteo et al, Ng et al) There are 
several notable findings that diverge from other publications. Interestingly, tumor size was not a prognostic factor in multivariate analysis. This should be explained by the authors if this article is to 
be published. 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Major Compulsory Revisions (that the author must respond to before a decision on publication can be 
reached) 
1. Paragraph 1, line 7: Please provide reference - (uncontrolled anti-apoptotic effect) 
2. Needs extensive grammatical editing throughout the manuscript. 
3. Paragraph 2, line 1: Surgical resection is the mainstay of treatment 
for "primary" GIST, not all GISTs. Imatinib is the treatment for 
metastatic GIST. Rephrase ?"for primary GISTS" 
Results 
Clinical characteristics: 
4. Paragraph 2: Any evidence of a familial pattern of GIST in this 
patient with multiple small intestine lesions? 
5. Paragraph 2, line 4: 
"Panendoscopy" ? please define 
Treatments and Outcomes 
6. Paragraph 2, line 1: 
Please define"Curative resection" here & subsequently. Do the authors mean complete resection? 
Discussion 
7. Why is tumor size not an independent predictor of OS/OFS by 
multivariate analysis? Please comment on a possible explanation. 
Table 2 
8. Please comment on the interesting trends toward a difference in 
DFS/OS by Gender, Operation time and Tumor size. 
Table 5 
10. Please comment on why the author's finding that tumor size does not 
impact OS/DSF. 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
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) 
Please review this paper.
user
Reviewer's report 
 Surgical treatment and prognostic analysis for gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) of the small Title: 
intestine: Before the era of Imatinib Mesylate 
 1  8 May 2006 Version: Date: 
 Jonathan Trent Reviewer: 
Reviewer's report: 
General 
This manuscript describes the outcomes of patients with small intestine GISTs treated prior to imatinib. It is of historical interest but has been 
described in prior publications (DeMatteo et al, Ng et al) There are 
several notable findings that diverge from other publications. Interestingly, tumor size was not a prognostic factor in multivariate analysis. This should be explained by the authors if this article is to 
be published. 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Major Compulsory Revisions (that the author must respond to before a decision on publication can be 
reached) 
1. Paragraph 1, line 7: Please provide reference - (uncontrolled anti-apoptotic effect) 
2. Needs extensive grammatical editing throughout the manuscript. 
3. Paragraph 2, line 1: Surgical resection is the mainstay of treatment 
for "primary" GIST, not all GISTs. Imatinib is the treatment for 
metastatic GIST. Rephrase ?"for primary GISTS" 
Results 
Clinical characteristics: 
4. Paragraph 2: Any evidence of a familial pattern of GIST in this 
patient with multiple small intestine lesions? 
5. Paragraph 2, line 4: 
"Panendoscopy" ? please define 
Treatments and Outcomes 
6. Paragraph 2, line 1: 
Please define"Curative resection" here & subsequently. Do the authors mean complete resection? 
Discussion 
7. Why is tumor size not an independent predictor of OS/OFS by 
multivariate analysis? Please comment on a possible explanation. 
Table 2 
8. Please comment on the interesting trends toward a difference in 
DFS/OS by Gender, Operation time and Tumor size. 
Table 5 
10. Please comment on why the author's finding that tumor size does not 
impact OS/DSF. 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
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) 
assistant