Reviewer's report
Title:Influence of laparoscopic-assisted gastrectomy and open gastrectomy on
serum interleukin-6 levels in patients with gastric cancer among Asian
populations
Version:3Date:15 January 2015
Reviewer: Makoto Meguro
Reviewer's report:
The paper is a meta-analysis with 54 studies selected by PubMed, EBSCO,
Ovid, Wiley, Web of Science, WANFANG and VIP databases. Authors indicate
‘’compared with OG, LAG reduces the expression of IL-6 effectively and further
inhibits inflammatory reaction for GC patients among Asian population’’.
Although this study was well documented, there are significantly critical and
crucial problems as described below
> Meta-analysis should be performed by including Cochrane Library and
EMBASE databases.
> IL-6 values, tumor progression status, lymph node dissection status, and
reconstruction methods such as B-I or Roux-Y are not shown in Table 1.
Therefore, there are not easy to understand these reports.
> In the results section (p8 the last paragraph), Figure 6C shows asymmetric
shape, so there is existence of publication bias. Figure 6D shows symmetric
shape, so there is no existence of publication bias. A contradiction exists in this
results sention. And then, you should correspond to the existence of publication
bias.
> Authors described ‘’Subgroup analysis based on country showed that, in
Chinese and Japanese GC patients, both 40 postoperative and postoperative
increased serum IL-6 levels in LAG group were significantly lower 41 than those
in OG group (all P < 0.05); In Korean GC patients, postoperative and
postoperative 42 increased serum IL-6 levels in LAG group and OG group had
no obvious statistical differences (all 43 P > 0.05)’’.
Ref. 33 (Jung IK et al. reported) is shown only each 10 patients. This is not
universal in Korea’s GC operation. Therefore, this paper’s conclusion is
overstatement, so it is needed larger sample-sizes as you pointed out in
conclusion.
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: Yes, but I do not feel adequately qualified to assess the
statistics.
Reviewer's report
Title:Influence of laparoscopic-assisted gastrectomy and open gastrectomy on
serum interleukin-6 levels in patients with gastric cancer among Asian
populations
Version:3Date:15 January 2015
Reviewer: Makoto Meguro
Reviewer's report:
The paper is a meta-analysis with 54 studies selected by PubMed, EBSCO,
Ovid, Wiley, Web of Science, WANFANG and VIP databases. Authors indicate
‘’compared with OG, LAG reduces the expression of IL-6 effectively and further
inhibits inflammatory reaction for GC patients among Asian population’’.
Although this study was well documented, there are significantly critical and
crucial problems as described below
> Meta-analysis should be performed by including Cochrane Library and
EMBASE databases.
> IL-6 values, tumor progression status, lymph node dissection status, and
reconstruction methods such as B-I or Roux-Y are not shown in Table 1.
Therefore, there are not easy to understand these reports.
> In the results section (p8 the last paragraph), Figure 6C shows asymmetric
shape, so there is existence of publication bias. Figure 6D shows symmetric
shape, so there is no existence of publication bias. A contradiction exists in this
results sention. And then, you should correspond to the existence of publication
bias.
> Authors described ‘’Subgroup analysis based on country showed that, in
Chinese and Japanese GC patients, both 40 postoperative and postoperative
increased serum IL-6 levels in LAG group were significantly lower 41 than those
in OG group (all P < 0.05); In Korean GC patients, postoperative and
postoperative 42 increased serum IL-6 levels in LAG group and OG group had
no obvious statistical differences (all 43 P > 0.05)’’.
Ref. 33 (Jung IK et al. reported) is shown only each 10 patients. This is not
universal in Korea’s GC operation. Therefore, this paper’s conclusion is
overstatement, so it is needed larger sample-sizes as you pointed out in
conclusion.
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: Yes, but I do not feel adequately qualified to assess the
statistics.
Please review this paper.
user
Reviewer's report
Title:Influence of laparoscopic-assisted gastrectomy and open gastrectomy on
serum interleukin-6 levels in patients with gastric cancer among Asian
populations
Version:3Date:15 January 2015
Reviewer: Makoto Meguro
Reviewer's report:
The paper is a meta-analysis with 54 studies selected by PubMed, EBSCO,
Ovid, Wiley, Web of Science, WANFANG and VIP databases. Authors indicate
‘’compared with OG, LAG reduces the expression of IL-6 effectively and further
inhibits inflammatory reaction for GC patients among Asian population’’.
Although this study was well documented, there are significantly critical and
crucial problems as described below
> Meta-analysis should be performed by including Cochrane Library and
EMBASE databases.
> IL-6 values, tumor progression status, lymph node dissection status, and
reconstruction methods such as B-I or Roux-Y are not shown in Table 1.
Therefore, there are not easy to understand these reports.
> In the results section (p8 the last paragraph), Figure 6C shows asymmetric
shape, so there is existence of publication bias. Figure 6D shows symmetric
shape, so there is no existence of publication bias. A contradiction exists in this
results sention. And then, you should correspond to the existence of publication
bias.
> Authors described ‘’Subgroup analysis based on country showed that, in
Chinese and Japanese GC patients, both 40 postoperative and postoperative
increased serum IL-6 levels in LAG group were significantly lower 41 than those
in OG group (all P < 0.05); In Korean GC patients, postoperative and
postoperative 42 increased serum IL-6 levels in LAG group and OG group had
no obvious statistical differences (all 43 P > 0.05)’’.
Ref. 33 (Jung IK et al. reported) is shown only each 10 patients. This is not
universal in Korea’s GC operation. Therefore, this paper’s conclusion is
overstatement, so it is needed larger sample-sizes as you pointed out in
conclusion.
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: Yes, but I do not feel adequately qualified to assess the
statistics.
assistant