Title: Endoscopic manifestation of intestinal transplant-associated microangiopathy after stem
cell transplantation
Version: 2 Date: 31 Mar 2024
Reviewer's report:
PEER REVIEWER ASSESSMENTS:
OBJECTIVE - Full research articles: is there a clear objective that addresses one or several
testable research questions? (Brief or other article types: is there a clear objective?)
Yes - there is a clear objective
DESIGN - Is the current approach (including controls and analysis protocols) appropriate for
the objective?
Yes - the approach is appropriate
EXECUTION - Are the experiments and analyses performed with sufficient technical rigor to
allow confidence in the results?
Yes - experiments and analyses were performed appropriately
STATISTICS - Is the use of statistics in the manuscript appropriate?
Yes - appropriate statistical analyses have been used in the study
INTERPRETATION - Is the current interpretation/discussion of the results reasonable and not
overstated?
Yes - the author's interpretation is reasonable
OVERALL MANUSCRIPT POTENTIAL - Has the author addressed your concerns sufficiently
for you to now recommend the work as a technically sound contribution? If not, can further
revisions be made to make the work technically sound?
Yes - current version is technically sound
PEER REVIEWER COMMENTS:
GENERAL COMMENTS: HAVE THE AUTHORS RESPONDED ADEQUATELY TO
EACH OF THE QUESTIONS YOU RAISED IN YOUR COMMENTS
Yes I really think. Ow that the manuscript does address a more specific ability to diagnose iTAM
HAVE THEY MADE THE APPROPRIATE CHANGES IN THE MANUSCRIPT
YES!
WHAT IS YOUR OVERALL IMPRESSION OF THE REVISED MANUSCRIPT
Although this has been a long process now the criteria for the diagnosis of iTAM makes sense
and adds important objective findings to make an accurate diagnosis of iTAM and may even
question prior diagnoses of GVHD and CMV infection. The addition of pathological histologic
photos of GVHD and CMV infection really help the learner to differentiate rate these entities
which is absolutely critical to provide targeted therapy for each separate condition.
ADDITIONAL REQUESTS/SUGGESTIONS:
ARE THERE ANY ADDITIONAL REVISIONS THE AUTHORS SHOULD MAKE
As always, I have re-read the entire manuscript
1. Line 39 to really formalize this manuscript because you do not mention the pathological
findings on biopsy in this abstract, why not add the phrase ”based on pathognomonic
pathological changes of iTAM.” at the end of the sentence on line 39. This should be able to be
done by the editor. You nicely outline the pathological findings in the text as you have done on
lines 108-115!  well done! Now  no one can question you on the criteria you used to diagnose
iTAM
Title: Endoscopic manifestation of intestinal transplant-associated microangiopathy after stem
cell transplantation
Version: 2 Date: 31 Mar 2024
Reviewer's report:
PEER REVIEWER ASSESSMENTS:
OBJECTIVE - Full research articles: is there a clear objective that addresses one or several
testable research questions? (Brief or other article types: is there a clear objective?)
Yes - there is a clear objective
DESIGN - Is the current approach (including controls and analysis protocols) appropriate for
the objective?
Yes - the approach is appropriate
EXECUTION - Are the experiments and analyses performed with sufficient technical rigor to
allow confidence in the results?
Yes - experiments and analyses were performed appropriately
STATISTICS - Is the use of statistics in the manuscript appropriate?
Yes - appropriate statistical analyses have been used in the study
INTERPRETATION - Is the current interpretation/discussion of the results reasonable and not
overstated?
Yes - the author's interpretation is reasonable
OVERALL MANUSCRIPT POTENTIAL - Has the author addressed your concerns sufficiently
for you to now recommend the work as a technically sound contribution? If not, can further
revisions be made to make the work technically sound?
Yes - current version is technically sound
PEER REVIEWER COMMENTS:
GENERAL COMMENTS: HAVE THE AUTHORS RESPONDED ADEQUATELY TO
EACH OF THE QUESTIONS YOU RAISED IN YOUR COMMENTS
Yes I really think. Ow that the manuscript does address a more specific ability to diagnose iTAM
HAVE THEY MADE THE APPROPRIATE CHANGES IN THE MANUSCRIPT
YES!
WHAT IS YOUR OVERALL IMPRESSION OF THE REVISED MANUSCRIPT
Although this has been a long process now the criteria for the diagnosis of iTAM makes sense
and adds important objective findings to make an accurate diagnosis of iTAM and may even
question prior diagnoses of GVHD and CMV infection. The addition of pathological histologic
photos of GVHD and CMV infection really help the learner to differentiate rate these entities
which is absolutely critical to provide targeted therapy for each separate condition.
ADDITIONAL REQUESTS/SUGGESTIONS:
ARE THERE ANY ADDITIONAL REVISIONS THE AUTHORS SHOULD MAKE
As always, I have re-read the entire manuscript
1. Line 39 to really formalize this manuscript because you do not mention the pathological
findings on biopsy in this abstract, why not add the phrase ”based on pathognomonic
pathological changes of iTAM.” at the end of the sentence on line 39. This should be able to be
done by the editor. You nicely outline the pathological findings in the text as you have done on
lines 108-115!  well done! Now  no one can question you on the criteria you used to diagnose
iTAM
Please review this paper.
user
Title: Endoscopic manifestation of intestinal transplant-associated microangiopathy after stem
cell transplantation
Version: 2 Date: 31 Mar 2024
Reviewer's report:
PEER REVIEWER ASSESSMENTS:
OBJECTIVE - Full research articles: is there a clear objective that addresses one or several
testable research questions? (Brief or other article types: is there a clear objective?)
Yes - there is a clear objective
DESIGN - Is the current approach (including controls and analysis protocols) appropriate for
the objective?
Yes - the approach is appropriate
EXECUTION - Are the experiments and analyses performed with sufficient technical rigor to
allow confidence in the results?
Yes - experiments and analyses were performed appropriately
STATISTICS - Is the use of statistics in the manuscript appropriate?
Yes - appropriate statistical analyses have been used in the study
INTERPRETATION - Is the current interpretation/discussion of the results reasonable and not
overstated?
Yes - the author's interpretation is reasonable
OVERALL MANUSCRIPT POTENTIAL - Has the author addressed your concerns sufficiently
for you to now recommend the work as a technically sound contribution? If not, can further
revisions be made to make the work technically sound?
Yes - current version is technically sound
PEER REVIEWER COMMENTS:
GENERAL COMMENTS: HAVE THE AUTHORS RESPONDED ADEQUATELY TO
EACH OF THE QUESTIONS YOU RAISED IN YOUR COMMENTS
Yes I really think. Ow that the manuscript does address a more specific ability to diagnose iTAM
HAVE THEY MADE THE APPROPRIATE CHANGES IN THE MANUSCRIPT
YES!
WHAT IS YOUR OVERALL IMPRESSION OF THE REVISED MANUSCRIPT
Although this has been a long process now the criteria for the diagnosis of iTAM makes sense
and adds important objective findings to make an accurate diagnosis of iTAM and may even
question prior diagnoses of GVHD and CMV infection. The addition of pathological histologic
photos of GVHD and CMV infection really help the learner to differentiate rate these entities
which is absolutely critical to provide targeted therapy for each separate condition.
ADDITIONAL REQUESTS/SUGGESTIONS:
ARE THERE ANY ADDITIONAL REVISIONS THE AUTHORS SHOULD MAKE
As always, I have re-read the entire manuscript
1. Line 39 to really formalize this manuscript because you do not mention the pathological
findings on biopsy in this abstract, why not add the phrase ”based on pathognomonic
pathological changes of iTAM.” at the end of the sentence on line 39. This should be able to be
done by the editor. You nicely outline the pathological findings in the text as you have done on
lines 108-115!  well done! Now  no one can question you on the criteria you used to diagnose
iTAM
assistant