Title: Enhancing Liver Fibrosis Detection: A Novel PIGR-Utilizing Approach in Chronic
Hepatitis B Injury Assessment
Version: 0 Date: 07 Dec 2024
Reviewer:  Anwar Ashraf Abouelnasr
Reviewer's report:
Dear Authors, please address the following points below
-The introduction indicates that PIGR is involved in inflammation and immune cell infiltration;
however, a more comprehensive discussion of PIGR's role in fibrosis at the cellular and
molecular levels would enhance the argument for its use as a biomarker.
-Furthermore, it is essential to highlight how liver fibrosis specifically contributes to the
progression toward cirrhosis and cancer, along with the importance of early detection of fibrosis
in improving patient outcomes.
-Although the introduction briefly acknowledges the limitations of liver biopsy and non-invasive
methods, a more thorough comparison of existing biomarkers—including ELF score, liver
stiffness measurements, and other serum markers—against PIGR would present a stronger
rationale for PIGR as a novel and potentially valuable addition to the current diagnostic arsenal.
-The authors ought to clarify the criteria by which the 150 patients were selected from the larger
cohort of patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB). Were these patients selected randomly, or
was there a specific rationale for including certain individuals (e.g., based on the availability
of biopsy data)? Providing further details regarding the selection process would enhance
transparency and mitigate potential bias.
-Additionally, it is necessary to determine whether patients were classified according to specific
fibrosis stages, such as the METAVIR score or Scheuer classification.
-A more in-depth explanation of how PIGR interacts with hepatic stellate cells and other
fibrogenic pathways would contextualize the findings within the broader literature.
-Moreover, a comparison of PIGR with traditional biomarkers such as hyaluronic acid (HA),
procollagen type III amino-terminal propeptide (PCIII), and collagen type IV (CIV) in terms of
diagnostic accuracy and clinical utility would aid in positioning PIGR as a potential alternative
or complementary biomarker in clinical practice.
In conclusion, the manuscript presents compelling evidence supporting the potential role of
PIGR as a biomarker for liver fibrosis in patients with CHB. Incorporating these revisions would
render the manuscript more robust and provide clearer insights into the clinical applicability of
PIGR for liver fibrosis detection.
Title: Enhancing Liver Fibrosis Detection: A Novel PIGR-Utilizing Approach in Chronic
Hepatitis B Injury Assessment
Version: 0 Date: 07 Dec 2024
Reviewer:  Anwar Ashraf Abouelnasr
Reviewer's report:
Dear Authors, please address the following points below
-The introduction indicates that PIGR is involved in inflammation and immune cell infiltration;
however, a more comprehensive discussion of PIGR's role in fibrosis at the cellular and
molecular levels would enhance the argument for its use as a biomarker.
-Furthermore, it is essential to highlight how liver fibrosis specifically contributes to the
progression toward cirrhosis and cancer, along with the importance of early detection of fibrosis
in improving patient outcomes.
-Although the introduction briefly acknowledges the limitations of liver biopsy and non-invasive
methods, a more thorough comparison of existing biomarkers—including ELF score, liver
stiffness measurements, and other serum markers—against PIGR would present a stronger
rationale for PIGR as a novel and potentially valuable addition to the current diagnostic arsenal.
-The authors ought to clarify the criteria by which the 150 patients were selected from the larger
cohort of patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB). Were these patients selected randomly, or
was there a specific rationale for including certain individuals (e.g., based on the availability
of biopsy data)? Providing further details regarding the selection process would enhance
transparency and mitigate potential bias.
-Additionally, it is necessary to determine whether patients were classified according to specific
fibrosis stages, such as the METAVIR score or Scheuer classification.
-A more in-depth explanation of how PIGR interacts with hepatic stellate cells and other
fibrogenic pathways would contextualize the findings within the broader literature.
-Moreover, a comparison of PIGR with traditional biomarkers such as hyaluronic acid (HA),
procollagen type III amino-terminal propeptide (PCIII), and collagen type IV (CIV) in terms of
diagnostic accuracy and clinical utility would aid in positioning PIGR as a potential alternative
or complementary biomarker in clinical practice.
In conclusion, the manuscript presents compelling evidence supporting the potential role of
PIGR as a biomarker for liver fibrosis in patients with CHB. Incorporating these revisions would
render the manuscript more robust and provide clearer insights into the clinical applicability of
PIGR for liver fibrosis detection.
Please review this paper.
user
Title: Enhancing Liver Fibrosis Detection: A Novel PIGR-Utilizing Approach in Chronic
Hepatitis B Injury Assessment
Version: 0 Date: 07 Dec 2024
Reviewer:  Anwar Ashraf Abouelnasr
Reviewer's report:
Dear Authors, please address the following points below
-The introduction indicates that PIGR is involved in inflammation and immune cell infiltration;
however, a more comprehensive discussion of PIGR's role in fibrosis at the cellular and
molecular levels would enhance the argument for its use as a biomarker.
-Furthermore, it is essential to highlight how liver fibrosis specifically contributes to the
progression toward cirrhosis and cancer, along with the importance of early detection of fibrosis
in improving patient outcomes.
-Although the introduction briefly acknowledges the limitations of liver biopsy and non-invasive
methods, a more thorough comparison of existing biomarkers—including ELF score, liver
stiffness measurements, and other serum markers—against PIGR would present a stronger
rationale for PIGR as a novel and potentially valuable addition to the current diagnostic arsenal.
-The authors ought to clarify the criteria by which the 150 patients were selected from the larger
cohort of patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB). Were these patients selected randomly, or
was there a specific rationale for including certain individuals (e.g., based on the availability
of biopsy data)? Providing further details regarding the selection process would enhance
transparency and mitigate potential bias.
-Additionally, it is necessary to determine whether patients were classified according to specific
fibrosis stages, such as the METAVIR score or Scheuer classification.
-A more in-depth explanation of how PIGR interacts with hepatic stellate cells and other
fibrogenic pathways would contextualize the findings within the broader literature.
-Moreover, a comparison of PIGR with traditional biomarkers such as hyaluronic acid (HA),
procollagen type III amino-terminal propeptide (PCIII), and collagen type IV (CIV) in terms of
diagnostic accuracy and clinical utility would aid in positioning PIGR as a potential alternative
or complementary biomarker in clinical practice.
In conclusion, the manuscript presents compelling evidence supporting the potential role of
PIGR as a biomarker for liver fibrosis in patients with CHB. Incorporating these revisions would
render the manuscript more robust and provide clearer insights into the clinical applicability of
PIGR for liver fibrosis detection.
assistant