Reviewer's report
Title:The Potential Therapeutic Effect of Melatonin in Gastro-esophageal Reflux
Disease
Version: 3Date:25 July 2009
Reviewer: Debasish Bandyopadhyay
Reviewer's report:
This reviewer has thoroughly gone through the manuscript and finds the current
work very interesting and important.Studies on melatonin's esophageal and
gatro-protective ablity is an emerging area of research.
This work has studied in considerable details the ameliorative effect of melatonin
and omeprazole and their combination in the treatment of gastro-esophageal
reflux disease (GERD). In the current work, the authors have shown very clearly
that the GERD patients when treated with the combination of melatonin and
omeprazole improved completely from this painful situation and has no side
effects during and following such treatment. This is a very good work that needs
immediate publication. However, there are certain deficiencies in the preparation
of this manuscript which this reviewer wishes to point out, and, the suggestions, if
incorporated will surely increase the readership and scientific quality of this
paper.
The specific comments are as follows:
(A) Minor Essential Revisions:
THIS REVIEWER HAS TAKEN CARE OF TYPOGRAPHICAL MISTAKES AND
SOME LANGUAGE ERRORS WHICH ARE MENTIONED BELOW:
(a)
1. Abstract; Line 1 (Page 2), Gastro-Esophageal Reflux Disease (GERD)is
defined.......
2.Abstract; Subjects and Methods; Line 2 (Page 2), disease treated with
melatonin......
3. Results; line 2 (Page 3), alone is a better.....
4. Page 3; Line 3, bracke shoul be removed.
5. Page3, Para 2, Line 1, knowledge and not "Knowledge"
6. Page 3, Line 3, that melatonin is synthesized......
7. Page 3, Line 4, Organs. A special attention......
8. Page 3, last but one line, HCl and not "HCL"
9. Page 3, Only a few studies on.....
10.Page 3, para 3, last line bracket shoul be removed.
11. Page 4. Line 1, consent......
12. Page 4, Line 20, Lower Esophageal Sphinctor (LES).......
13. Page 4, Line 21, and finally 27 subjects........
14, Page 5, Line 1, and serum thus obtained..................
15. Page 5, Lines 3-5, meaning is not clear. This portion should be re-written.
16. Page 5, Line 15, statistical..........
17. Page 5, Result section; All the sub-headings shoul be in the bold, small caps.
18. Page 6, Line 18, A significant........
19. Page 6, Line 19, in the form of increased LES pressure was also noted.
20. Page 6, Line 19, In addition, there is a ..........
21. Page 7, Line 6, showed a significant increase in pH.........
22. Page 13, Discussion section, Line 6, Melatonin has also been detected in the
...........
23. Page 13, Line 8, G-protein coupled receptors [ Ref.? ]
24, Page 13, Line 14, This observation is in agreement with.........
25Page 13, line 22, deficiency of the indole.
26. Page 14, Line 12, The current study also evaluates.......
27. Page 14, Line 15, "and confirmed that it had few, if any, adverse effects" may
be deleted.
28. Page 16, Line 5, However, the pH, 5 cm above..........
(b) In the discussion section, Page 14, in between Lines 12 and 16, the authors
may add one sentence as follows:
"Pharmacologically administered low and high doses of melatonin have been
found to be with very low or no toxicity [Ref. Bandyopadhyay D, Chattopadhyay
A. Reactive oxygen species-induced gastric ulceration : Protection by melatonin.
Current Medicinal Chemistry 2006; 13: 1187-1202.].
(c)Page 5, Lines 3-5, the meaning is not clear. The authors may re-write these
lines to make it easily understandable.
(d) The authors should mention in the manuscript which brand of melatonin thay
have used. The same is also for omeprazole.
(e)There should be an "acknowledgement" section in the manuscript which may
indicate the the authors funding sources, the people who might have helped
them in the current work in various manner etc.
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Needs some language corrections before being
published
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a
statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
'I declare that I have no competing interests'
Reviewer's report
Title:The Potential Therapeutic Effect of Melatonin in Gastro-esophageal Reflux
Disease
Version: 3Date:25 July 2009
Reviewer: Debasish Bandyopadhyay
Reviewer's report:
This reviewer has thoroughly gone through the manuscript and finds the current
work very interesting and important.Studies on melatonin's esophageal and
gatro-protective ablity is an emerging area of research.
This work has studied in considerable details the ameliorative effect of melatonin
and omeprazole and their combination in the treatment of gastro-esophageal
reflux disease (GERD). In the current work, the authors have shown very clearly
that the GERD patients when treated with the combination of melatonin and
omeprazole improved completely from this painful situation and has no side
effects during and following such treatment. This is a very good work that needs
immediate publication. However, there are certain deficiencies in the preparation
of this manuscript which this reviewer wishes to point out, and, the suggestions, if
incorporated will surely increase the readership and scientific quality of this
paper.
The specific comments are as follows:
(A) Minor Essential Revisions:
THIS REVIEWER HAS TAKEN CARE OF TYPOGRAPHICAL MISTAKES AND
SOME LANGUAGE ERRORS WHICH ARE MENTIONED BELOW:
(a)
1. Abstract; Line 1 (Page 2), Gastro-Esophageal Reflux Disease (GERD)is
defined.......
2.Abstract; Subjects and Methods; Line 2 (Page 2), disease treated with
melatonin......
3. Results; line 2 (Page 3), alone is a better.....
4. Page 3; Line 3, bracke shoul be removed.
5. Page3, Para 2, Line 1, knowledge and not "Knowledge"
6. Page 3, Line 3, that melatonin is synthesized......
7. Page 3, Line 4, Organs. A special attention......
8. Page 3, last but one line, HCl and not "HCL"
9. Page 3, Only a few studies on.....
10.Page 3, para 3, last line bracket shoul be removed.
11. Page 4. Line 1, consent......
12. Page 4, Line 20, Lower Esophageal Sphinctor (LES).......
13. Page 4, Line 21, and finally 27 subjects........
14, Page 5, Line 1, and serum thus obtained..................
15. Page 5, Lines 3-5, meaning is not clear. This portion should be re-written.
16. Page 5, Line 15, statistical..........
17. Page 5, Result section; All the sub-headings shoul be in the bold, small caps.
18. Page 6, Line 18, A significant........
19. Page 6, Line 19, in the form of increased LES pressure was also noted.
20. Page 6, Line 19, In addition, there is a ..........
21. Page 7, Line 6, showed a significant increase in pH.........
22. Page 13, Discussion section, Line 6, Melatonin has also been detected in the
...........
23. Page 13, Line 8, G-protein coupled receptors [ Ref.? ]
24, Page 13, Line 14, This observation is in agreement with.........
25Page 13, line 22, deficiency of the indole.
26. Page 14, Line 12, The current study also evaluates.......
27. Page 14, Line 15, "and confirmed that it had few, if any, adverse effects" may
be deleted.
28. Page 16, Line 5, However, the pH, 5 cm above..........
(b) In the discussion section, Page 14, in between Lines 12 and 16, the authors
may add one sentence as follows:
"Pharmacologically administered low and high doses of melatonin have been
found to be with very low or no toxicity [Ref. Bandyopadhyay D, Chattopadhyay
A. Reactive oxygen species-induced gastric ulceration : Protection by melatonin.
Current Medicinal Chemistry 2006; 13: 1187-1202.].
(c)Page 5, Lines 3-5, the meaning is not clear. The authors may re-write these
lines to make it easily understandable.
(d) The authors should mention in the manuscript which brand of melatonin thay
have used. The same is also for omeprazole.
(e)There should be an "acknowledgement" section in the manuscript which may
indicate the the authors funding sources, the people who might have helped
them in the current work in various manner etc.
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Needs some language corrections before being
published
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a
statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
'I declare that I have no competing interests'
Please review this paper.
user
Reviewer's report
Title:The Potential Therapeutic Effect of Melatonin in Gastro-esophageal Reflux
Disease
Version: 3Date:25 July 2009
Reviewer: Debasish Bandyopadhyay
Reviewer's report:
This reviewer has thoroughly gone through the manuscript and finds the current
work very interesting and important.Studies on melatonin's esophageal and
gatro-protective ablity is an emerging area of research.
This work has studied in considerable details the ameliorative effect of melatonin
and omeprazole and their combination in the treatment of gastro-esophageal
reflux disease (GERD). In the current work, the authors have shown very clearly
that the GERD patients when treated with the combination of melatonin and
omeprazole improved completely from this painful situation and has no side
effects during and following such treatment. This is a very good work that needs
immediate publication. However, there are certain deficiencies in the preparation
of this manuscript which this reviewer wishes to point out, and, the suggestions, if
incorporated will surely increase the readership and scientific quality of this
paper.
The specific comments are as follows:
(A) Minor Essential Revisions:
THIS REVIEWER HAS TAKEN CARE OF TYPOGRAPHICAL MISTAKES AND
SOME LANGUAGE ERRORS WHICH ARE MENTIONED BELOW:
(a)
1. Abstract; Line 1 (Page 2), Gastro-Esophageal Reflux Disease (GERD)is
defined.......
2.Abstract; Subjects and Methods; Line 2 (Page 2), disease treated with
melatonin......
3. Results; line 2 (Page 3), alone is a better.....
4. Page 3; Line 3, bracke shoul be removed.
5. Page3, Para 2, Line 1, knowledge and not "Knowledge"
6. Page 3, Line 3, that melatonin is synthesized......
7. Page 3, Line 4, Organs. A special attention......
8. Page 3, last but one line, HCl and not "HCL"
9. Page 3, Only a few studies on.....
10.Page 3, para 3, last line bracket shoul be removed.
11. Page 4. Line 1, consent......
12. Page 4, Line 20, Lower Esophageal Sphinctor (LES).......
13. Page 4, Line 21, and finally 27 subjects........
14, Page 5, Line 1, and serum thus obtained..................
15. Page 5, Lines 3-5, meaning is not clear. This portion should be re-written.
16. Page 5, Line 15, statistical..........
17. Page 5, Result section; All the sub-headings shoul be in the bold, small caps.
18. Page 6, Line 18, A significant........
19. Page 6, Line 19, in the form of increased LES pressure was also noted.
20. Page 6, Line 19, In addition, there is a ..........
21. Page 7, Line 6, showed a significant increase in pH.........
22. Page 13, Discussion section, Line 6, Melatonin has also been detected in the
...........
23. Page 13, Line 8, G-protein coupled receptors [ Ref.? ]
24, Page 13, Line 14, This observation is in agreement with.........
25Page 13, line 22, deficiency of the indole.
26. Page 14, Line 12, The current study also evaluates.......
27. Page 14, Line 15, "and confirmed that it had few, if any, adverse effects" may
be deleted.
28. Page 16, Line 5, However, the pH, 5 cm above..........
(b) In the discussion section, Page 14, in between Lines 12 and 16, the authors
may add one sentence as follows:
"Pharmacologically administered low and high doses of melatonin have been
found to be with very low or no toxicity [Ref. Bandyopadhyay D, Chattopadhyay
A. Reactive oxygen species-induced gastric ulceration : Protection by melatonin.
Current Medicinal Chemistry 2006; 13: 1187-1202.].
(c)Page 5, Lines 3-5, the meaning is not clear. The authors may re-write these
lines to make it easily understandable.
(d) The authors should mention in the manuscript which brand of melatonin thay
have used. The same is also for omeprazole.
(e)There should be an "acknowledgement" section in the manuscript which may
indicate the the authors funding sources, the people who might have helped
them in the current work in various manner etc.
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Needs some language corrections before being
published
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a
statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
'I declare that I have no competing interests'
assistant