Reviewer ’s report  
 
Title:  The red distribution width and the platelet distribution  width as prognostic predictors in 
gastric cancer  
 
Version: 0 Date: 25 Apr 2017 
 
Reviewer:  Karen  Mulder  
 
Reviewer’s report:  
 
The use of red cell distribution and platelet distribution as prognostic predictors in gastric cancer 
is an interesting concept with increasing investigation in other malignancies as well.   
 
In the method section, a list of exclusion criteria are listed  (line 66 - 68).  No data is provided 
however in regards to how many patients with GC were excluded based on these criteria. It is 
unclear in this particular study, if both the healthy control a rm as well as the GC arms were 
controlled for other co -morbidities which can affect the RDW.  Furthermore there are other co -
morbidities that also increase RDW which are not listed in your exclusion criteria  (ie liver 
disease, advanced subclinical atheros clerosis) How was this controlled for in your cohorts?  
 
As RDW is typically reported as a percentage, please indicate that in your values indicated on 
lines 102 -108.  Assuming you are reporting RDW in percentage, both your mean preoperative 
RDW in GC patie nts and healthy controls are within the usual normal range (high RDW is 
usually defined > 14.5%).  Furthermore as per table 2, you used a cutoff of 12.85% to define 
high and low groups.  Previous studies have used >= 15%.  Please explain your reasoning beh ind 
using the cutoff of 12.85%  Similarly median PDW has been described as being 13% with a 
reference range of 10 -17.9%. How was the PDW >= 11.95% determined to be the cut off to 
define high and low groups?  
 
Are the methods appropriate and well described?  
If not, please specify what is required in your comments to the authors.  
 
Yes 
 
Does the work include the necessary controls?  
If not, please specify which controls are  required in your comments to the authors.  
 
No 
 
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the data shown?  
If not, please explain in your comments to the authors.  
 
No 
 
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 reco mmend additional statistical review  
 
Quality of written English  
Please indicate the qu ality of language in the manuscript:  
 
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, funding, 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 public ation 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, write 'I declare t hat 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 included 
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 Access 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:  The red distribution width and the platelet distribution  width as prognostic predictors in 
gastric cancer  
 
Version: 0 Date: 25 Apr 2017 
 
Reviewer:  Karen  Mulder  
 
Reviewer’s report:  
 
The use of red cell distribution and platelet distribution as prognostic predictors in gastric cancer 
is an interesting concept with increasing investigation in other malignancies as well.   
 
In the method section, a list of exclusion criteria are listed  (line 66 - 68).  No data is provided 
however in regards to how many patients with GC were excluded based on these criteria. It is 
unclear in this particular study, if both the healthy control a rm as well as the GC arms were 
controlled for other co -morbidities which can affect the RDW.  Furthermore there are other co -
morbidities that also increase RDW which are not listed in your exclusion criteria  (ie liver 
disease, advanced subclinical atheros clerosis) How was this controlled for in your cohorts?  
 
As RDW is typically reported as a percentage, please indicate that in your values indicated on 
lines 102 -108.  Assuming you are reporting RDW in percentage, both your mean preoperative 
RDW in GC patie nts and healthy controls are within the usual normal range (high RDW is 
usually defined > 14.5%).  Furthermore as per table 2, you used a cutoff of 12.85% to define 
high and low groups.  Previous studies have used >= 15%.  Please explain your reasoning beh ind 
using the cutoff of 12.85%  Similarly median PDW has been described as being 13% with a 
reference range of 10 -17.9%. How was the PDW >= 11.95% determined to be the cut off to 
define high and low groups?  
 
Are the methods appropriate and well described?  
If not, please specify what is required in your comments to the authors.  
 
Yes 
 
Does the work include the necessary controls?  
If not, please specify which controls are  required in your comments to the authors.  
 
No 
 
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the data shown?  
If not, please explain in your comments to the authors.  
 
No 
 
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 reco mmend additional statistical review  
 
Quality of written English  
Please indicate the qu ality of language in the manuscript:  
 
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, funding, 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 public ation 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, write 'I declare t hat 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 included 
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 Access 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:  The red distribution width and the platelet distribution  width as prognostic predictors in 
gastric cancer  
 
Version: 0 Date: 25 Apr 2017 
 
Reviewer:  Karen  Mulder  
 
Reviewer’s report:  
 
The use of red cell distribution and platelet distribution as prognostic predictors in gastric cancer 
is an interesting concept with increasing investigation in other malignancies as well.   
 
In the method section, a list of exclusion criteria are listed  (line 66 - 68).  No data is provided 
however in regards to how many patients with GC were excluded based on these criteria. It is 
unclear in this particular study, if both the healthy control a rm as well as the GC arms were 
controlled for other co -morbidities which can affect the RDW.  Furthermore there are other co -
morbidities that also increase RDW which are not listed in your exclusion criteria  (ie liver 
disease, advanced subclinical atheros clerosis) How was this controlled for in your cohorts?  
 
As RDW is typically reported as a percentage, please indicate that in your values indicated on 
lines 102 -108.  Assuming you are reporting RDW in percentage, both your mean preoperative 
RDW in GC patie nts and healthy controls are within the usual normal range (high RDW is 
usually defined > 14.5%).  Furthermore as per table 2, you used a cutoff of 12.85% to define 
high and low groups.  Previous studies have used >= 15%.  Please explain your reasoning beh ind 
using the cutoff of 12.85%  Similarly median PDW has been described as being 13% with a 
reference range of 10 -17.9%. How was the PDW >= 11.95% determined to be the cut off to 
define high and low groups?  
 
Are the methods appropriate and well described?  
If not, please specify what is required in your comments to the authors.  
 
Yes 
 
Does the work include the necessary controls?  
If not, please specify which controls are  required in your comments to the authors.  
 
No 
 
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the data shown?  
If not, please explain in your comments to the authors.  
 
No 
 
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 reco mmend additional statistical review  
 
Quality of written English  
Please indicate the qu ality of language in the manuscript:  
 
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, funding, 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 public ation 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, write 'I declare t hat 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 included 
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 Access 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