Title: A novel method for early detection of colorectal cancer based on detection of methylation
of two fragments of syndecan-2 (SDC2) in stool DNA
Version: 0 Date: 29 Dec 2021
Reviewer's report:
‘A novel method for early detection of colorectal cancer based on detection of methylation of
two fragments of syndecan-2 (SDC2) in stool DNA’. The authors have studied on aberrant DNA
detection in stool for diagnosing colon cancer. There are concerns that authors need to clarify.
Hypermethylation of SDC2 promotor region in development of colorectal neoplasms is a
frequent epigenetic change. How frequent? This is important for the study in context.
How many stool samples were discarded for poor quality or errors in extraction?
Methods need referencing at places. For example- “Following the Clinical Laboratory Standards
Institute (CLSI) guideline about interference testing, EP7-A2, and Guide to interference testing
in clinical chemistry, WS/T 416-2013”- Please enumerate all the references.
Give a figure of study enrolment.
The description of 339 participants under sample collection section should go in results rather
than methods. Also give description of the eighteen patients diagnosed as ‘colitis’. The basis of
diagnosis of advanced and non-advanced adenomas should be mentioned in methods.
What steps were taken for blinding if any? Were consecutive patients taken to avoid selection
bias? This needs to be mentioned
Was there any difference between detection rates based on age? If so, the possible reason needs
to be explained in discussion too.
Title: A novel method for early detection of colorectal cancer based on detection of methylation
of two fragments of syndecan-2 (SDC2) in stool DNA
Version: 0 Date: 29 Dec 2021
Reviewer's report:
‘A novel method for early detection of colorectal cancer based on detection of methylation of
two fragments of syndecan-2 (SDC2) in stool DNA’. The authors have studied on aberrant DNA
detection in stool for diagnosing colon cancer. There are concerns that authors need to clarify.
Hypermethylation of SDC2 promotor region in development of colorectal neoplasms is a
frequent epigenetic change. How frequent? This is important for the study in context.
How many stool samples were discarded for poor quality or errors in extraction?
Methods need referencing at places. For example- “Following the Clinical Laboratory Standards
Institute (CLSI) guideline about interference testing, EP7-A2, and Guide to interference testing
in clinical chemistry, WS/T 416-2013”- Please enumerate all the references.
Give a figure of study enrolment.
The description of 339 participants under sample collection section should go in results rather
than methods. Also give description of the eighteen patients diagnosed as ‘colitis’. The basis of
diagnosis of advanced and non-advanced adenomas should be mentioned in methods.
What steps were taken for blinding if any? Were consecutive patients taken to avoid selection
bias? This needs to be mentioned
Was there any difference between detection rates based on age? If so, the possible reason needs
to be explained in discussion too.
Please review this paper.
user
Title: A novel method for early detection of colorectal cancer based on detection of methylation
of two fragments of syndecan-2 (SDC2) in stool DNA
Version: 0 Date: 29 Dec 2021
Reviewer's report:
‘A novel method for early detection of colorectal cancer based on detection of methylation of
two fragments of syndecan-2 (SDC2) in stool DNA’. The authors have studied on aberrant DNA
detection in stool for diagnosing colon cancer. There are concerns that authors need to clarify.
Hypermethylation of SDC2 promotor region in development of colorectal neoplasms is a
frequent epigenetic change. How frequent? This is important for the study in context.
How many stool samples were discarded for poor quality or errors in extraction?
Methods need referencing at places. For example- “Following the Clinical Laboratory Standards
Institute (CLSI) guideline about interference testing, EP7-A2, and Guide to interference testing
in clinical chemistry, WS/T 416-2013”- Please enumerate all the references.
Give a figure of study enrolment.
The description of 339 participants under sample collection section should go in results rather
than methods. Also give description of the eighteen patients diagnosed as ‘colitis’. The basis of
diagnosis of advanced and non-advanced adenomas should be mentioned in methods.
What steps were taken for blinding if any? Were consecutive patients taken to avoid selection
bias? This needs to be mentioned
Was there any difference between detection rates based on age? If so, the possible reason needs
to be explained in discussion too.
assistant