Reviewer's report
Title:The added value of using mutational profiling in addition to cytology in
diagnosing pancreaticobiliary malignancy: review of clinical cases at a single
center
Version:1Date:25 April 2014
Reviewer: Hanno Matthaei
Reviewer's report:
In their Article "The added value of using mutational profiling in addition to
cytology in diagnosing pancreaticobiliary malignancy: review of clinical cases at a
single center" Mahotra et al analyzed the value of mutational analyses
(MP=mutational profiling) of DNA from micordissected cytology slides and
supernatant specimens from biliary brushings in order to predict
histology/malignancy. The authors used an established panel of DNA alterations
in their analyses and found that these assays are capable of providing additional
information regarding the presence of cancer. The authors concluded that MP is
particularly useful in patients that were hard to diagnose by cytology alone.
In the past years large scale DNA profiling (such as next generation sequencing)
has revealed many cancer specific genetic alterations. Mahotra et al demonstrate
an important and elegant translational application of this genetic knowledge and
show a very promising approach. Cytology with its known limited sensitivity and
specificity can obviously be supported by genetic testing. Even if the authors
show only a small series the translational approach is intriguing. The manuscript
is well written and altogether I thinks very suitable for publication in BMC
Gastroenterology.
Major:
- The paper is missing some important studies in the field. For example, when
investigating the use of pancreatobiliary cancer specific DNA alterations
comprehensive DNA profiling publications such as Jiao et al. Nat Gen 2013
(intrahepatic CCC) and Jones et al. Science 2008 (PDAC) should be cited.
Minor:
- Line 41: It should be "than" instead of "that"
- Line 65: The long sentence "Patient outcomes..." should be rewritten.
Outcomes should not be categorized as malignant etc. (rather histologies). Also:
Please refer to the classification of tumors in the methods. Which lesions are
being investigated (e.g. pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, ampullary
adenocarcinomas, cholangiocarcinome) and according to which reference (WHO
blue book)?
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
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 added value of using mutational profiling in addition to cytology in
diagnosing pancreaticobiliary malignancy: review of clinical cases at a single
center
Version:1Date:25 April 2014
Reviewer: Hanno Matthaei
Reviewer's report:
In their Article "The added value of using mutational profiling in addition to
cytology in diagnosing pancreaticobiliary malignancy: review of clinical cases at a
single center" Mahotra et al analyzed the value of mutational analyses
(MP=mutational profiling) of DNA from micordissected cytology slides and
supernatant specimens from biliary brushings in order to predict
histology/malignancy. The authors used an established panel of DNA alterations
in their analyses and found that these assays are capable of providing additional
information regarding the presence of cancer. The authors concluded that MP is
particularly useful in patients that were hard to diagnose by cytology alone.
In the past years large scale DNA profiling (such as next generation sequencing)
has revealed many cancer specific genetic alterations. Mahotra et al demonstrate
an important and elegant translational application of this genetic knowledge and
show a very promising approach. Cytology with its known limited sensitivity and
specificity can obviously be supported by genetic testing. Even if the authors
show only a small series the translational approach is intriguing. The manuscript
is well written and altogether I thinks very suitable for publication in BMC
Gastroenterology.
Major:
- The paper is missing some important studies in the field. For example, when
investigating the use of pancreatobiliary cancer specific DNA alterations
comprehensive DNA profiling publications such as Jiao et al. Nat Gen 2013
(intrahepatic CCC) and Jones et al. Science 2008 (PDAC) should be cited.
Minor:
- Line 41: It should be "than" instead of "that"
- Line 65: The long sentence "Patient outcomes..." should be rewritten.
Outcomes should not be categorized as malignant etc. (rather histologies). Also:
Please refer to the classification of tumors in the methods. Which lesions are
being investigated (e.g. pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, ampullary
adenocarcinomas, cholangiocarcinome) and according to which reference (WHO
blue book)?
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
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 added value of using mutational profiling in addition to cytology in
diagnosing pancreaticobiliary malignancy: review of clinical cases at a single
center
Version:1Date:25 April 2014
Reviewer: Hanno Matthaei
Reviewer's report:
In their Article "The added value of using mutational profiling in addition to
cytology in diagnosing pancreaticobiliary malignancy: review of clinical cases at a
single center" Mahotra et al analyzed the value of mutational analyses
(MP=mutational profiling) of DNA from micordissected cytology slides and
supernatant specimens from biliary brushings in order to predict
histology/malignancy. The authors used an established panel of DNA alterations
in their analyses and found that these assays are capable of providing additional
information regarding the presence of cancer. The authors concluded that MP is
particularly useful in patients that were hard to diagnose by cytology alone.
In the past years large scale DNA profiling (such as next generation sequencing)
has revealed many cancer specific genetic alterations. Mahotra et al demonstrate
an important and elegant translational application of this genetic knowledge and
show a very promising approach. Cytology with its known limited sensitivity and
specificity can obviously be supported by genetic testing. Even if the authors
show only a small series the translational approach is intriguing. The manuscript
is well written and altogether I thinks very suitable for publication in BMC
Gastroenterology.
Major:
- The paper is missing some important studies in the field. For example, when
investigating the use of pancreatobiliary cancer specific DNA alterations
comprehensive DNA profiling publications such as Jiao et al. Nat Gen 2013
(intrahepatic CCC) and Jones et al. Science 2008 (PDAC) should be cited.
Minor:
- Line 41: It should be "than" instead of "that"
- Line 65: The long sentence "Patient outcomes..." should be rewritten.
Outcomes should not be categorized as malignant etc. (rather histologies). Also:
Please refer to the classification of tumors in the methods. Which lesions are
being investigated (e.g. pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, ampullary
adenocarcinomas, cholangiocarcinome) and according to which reference (WHO
blue book)?
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
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