Reviewer's report
Title:Gluten sensitivity enteropathy and recurrent aphthous stomatitis
Version: 6Date:12 March 2009
Reviewer: Luca Pastore
Reviewer's report:
Major Compulsory Revisions
- Authors assert that “GSE should be considered in RAS patients who are
refractory to conventional anti-aphthae treatment” since all the 7 patients with
GSE they observed had refractory RAS; to draw such a conclusion authors
should compare the prevalence of refractory and non-refractory RAS in patients
with and without GSE. Authors could draw the following conclusion: “GSE should
be considered in RAS patients; unresponsiveness to conventional anti-aphthae
treatment could be an additional risk indicator”.
- “All the GSE patients were unresponsive to previous trials of conventional
anti-aphthae drugs (e.g. tetracycline, diphenhydramine, and colchicine)”;
consider that the mainstay of therapy for mild RAS is topical corticosteroids.
Minor Essential Revisions
- Page 2: “in those who diagnosed” should be “in those who were diagnosed”.
- Page 4: “diagnosed because of new serological screening methods” should be
“diagnosed by screening with serological tests”.
- Page 5: “An inclusion criterion was suffering from oral aphthae at least three
times per year, and exclusion criteria were…” could be “Patients included in the
study had had at least three episodes of oral aphthae during the year; exclusion
criteria were…”.
- Page 8: “None of them complained from other symptoms of CD including
infertility, gastrointestinal or dermatologic problems” could be “None of them
complained from other typical or atypical signs and symptoms of CD”.
- Page 8: “GSE patients adhered to strict gluten free diet” should be “GSE
patients started a strict gluten free diet”.
- Page 8: “was decreased to” should be “decreased to”.
- Page 9: “a 2.83% prevalence of GSE was observed. This could be compared
with the prevalence of 0.9% of GSE in the general population” could be “a 2.83%
prevalence of GSE was observed, as compared with an estimated prevalence of
0.9% in the general population”.
- Page 10: “Prevalence of GSE was estimated 2.83% which was about 3-fold
higher than its prevalence in general population” could be “Prevalence of GSE in
patients with RAS was 2.83% , which is about 3-fold higher than that expected in
general population”.
- Page 10: “Four of our patients accepted to consider GFD” could be “Four
patients accepted to start GFD”.
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:Gluten sensitivity enteropathy and recurrent aphthous stomatitis
Version: 6Date:12 March 2009
Reviewer: Luca Pastore
Reviewer's report:
Major Compulsory Revisions
- Authors assert that “GSE should be considered in RAS patients who are
refractory to conventional anti-aphthae treatment” since all the 7 patients with
GSE they observed had refractory RAS; to draw such a conclusion authors
should compare the prevalence of refractory and non-refractory RAS in patients
with and without GSE. Authors could draw the following conclusion: “GSE should
be considered in RAS patients; unresponsiveness to conventional anti-aphthae
treatment could be an additional risk indicator”.
- “All the GSE patients were unresponsive to previous trials of conventional
anti-aphthae drugs (e.g. tetracycline, diphenhydramine, and colchicine)”;
consider that the mainstay of therapy for mild RAS is topical corticosteroids.
Minor Essential Revisions
- Page 2: “in those who diagnosed” should be “in those who were diagnosed”.
- Page 4: “diagnosed because of new serological screening methods” should be
“diagnosed by screening with serological tests”.
- Page 5: “An inclusion criterion was suffering from oral aphthae at least three
times per year, and exclusion criteria were…” could be “Patients included in the
study had had at least three episodes of oral aphthae during the year; exclusion
criteria were…”.
- Page 8: “None of them complained from other symptoms of CD including
infertility, gastrointestinal or dermatologic problems” could be “None of them
complained from other typical or atypical signs and symptoms of CD”.
- Page 8: “GSE patients adhered to strict gluten free diet” should be “GSE
patients started a strict gluten free diet”.
- Page 8: “was decreased to” should be “decreased to”.
- Page 9: “a 2.83% prevalence of GSE was observed. This could be compared
with the prevalence of 0.9% of GSE in the general population” could be “a 2.83%
prevalence of GSE was observed, as compared with an estimated prevalence of
0.9% in the general population”.
- Page 10: “Prevalence of GSE was estimated 2.83% which was about 3-fold
higher than its prevalence in general population” could be “Prevalence of GSE in
patients with RAS was 2.83% , which is about 3-fold higher than that expected in
general population”.
- Page 10: “Four of our patients accepted to consider GFD” could be “Four
patients accepted to start GFD”.
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:Gluten sensitivity enteropathy and recurrent aphthous stomatitis
Version: 6Date:12 March 2009
Reviewer: Luca Pastore
Reviewer's report:
Major Compulsory Revisions
- Authors assert that “GSE should be considered in RAS patients who are
refractory to conventional anti-aphthae treatment” since all the 7 patients with
GSE they observed had refractory RAS; to draw such a conclusion authors
should compare the prevalence of refractory and non-refractory RAS in patients
with and without GSE. Authors could draw the following conclusion: “GSE should
be considered in RAS patients; unresponsiveness to conventional anti-aphthae
treatment could be an additional risk indicator”.
- “All the GSE patients were unresponsive to previous trials of conventional
anti-aphthae drugs (e.g. tetracycline, diphenhydramine, and colchicine)”;
consider that the mainstay of therapy for mild RAS is topical corticosteroids.
Minor Essential Revisions
- Page 2: “in those who diagnosed” should be “in those who were diagnosed”.
- Page 4: “diagnosed because of new serological screening methods” should be
“diagnosed by screening with serological tests”.
- Page 5: “An inclusion criterion was suffering from oral aphthae at least three
times per year, and exclusion criteria were…” could be “Patients included in the
study had had at least three episodes of oral aphthae during the year; exclusion
criteria were…”.
- Page 8: “None of them complained from other symptoms of CD including
infertility, gastrointestinal or dermatologic problems” could be “None of them
complained from other typical or atypical signs and symptoms of CD”.
- Page 8: “GSE patients adhered to strict gluten free diet” should be “GSE
patients started a strict gluten free diet”.
- Page 8: “was decreased to” should be “decreased to”.
- Page 9: “a 2.83% prevalence of GSE was observed. This could be compared
with the prevalence of 0.9% of GSE in the general population” could be “a 2.83%
prevalence of GSE was observed, as compared with an estimated prevalence of
0.9% in the general population”.
- Page 10: “Prevalence of GSE was estimated 2.83% which was about 3-fold
higher than its prevalence in general population” could be “Prevalence of GSE in
patients with RAS was 2.83% , which is about 3-fold higher than that expected in
general population”.
- Page 10: “Four of our patients accepted to consider GFD” could be “Four
patients accepted to start GFD”.
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