Reviewer's report
Title:Evaluation of dual-wavelength excitation autofluorescence imaging of
colorectal tumours with a high-sensitivity CMOS imager: a cross-sectional study
Version:1Date:9 June 2015
Reviewer: Elena V Filonenko
Reviewer's report:
Minor Essential Revisions (such as missing labels on figures, or the wrong use of
a term, which the author can be trusted to correct).
The manuscript is dedicated to evaluation of dual-wavelength excitation
autofluorescence imaging of colorectal tumours with a high-sensitivity CMOS
imager.
I have issues I would like addressed:
1. 34 and further as the text goes. In order to facilitate comprehension of the
work the group of lesions should be renamed: adenoma/M-ca into
adenoma+M-ca or adenoma and M-ca, SSA/Ps into SSA+Ps or SSA and Ps.
2.34 vs 91 and further as the text goes. In the text both “Ps” and “P” are used,
one variant should be chosen.
3. 36-37. The specimens were irradiated with excitation light at 365 nm and 405
nm, and autofluorescence images were obtained using a new, high-sensitivity
CMOS imager. It is necessary to represent the wavelength in which
autofluorescence registration was performed using high-sensitivity CMOS
imager.
4. 91. The sentence should be written as “adenocarcinoma (M-ca), adenoma,
and sessile serrated adenoma (SSA), polyp (P) specimens”.
5. 101. The study included 98 patients. However, authors indicated that there
were 64 men and 36 women, (n=100).
6. 171. There is misspelling: “u” in the word “florescence” is missed.
7. 220. Literature older than 5 year is 75,7% of given references, thus do not
reflect the realty of modern colon cancer diagnosis (inc. fluorescence diagnosis),
and given statistics may not correspond to up-to-date situation.
Level of interest: An article of outstanding merit and interest 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:Evaluation of dual-wavelength excitation autofluorescence imaging of
colorectal tumours with a high-sensitivity CMOS imager: a cross-sectional study
Version:1Date:9 June 2015
Reviewer: Elena V Filonenko
Reviewer's report:
Minor Essential Revisions (such as missing labels on figures, or the wrong use of
a term, which the author can be trusted to correct).
The manuscript is dedicated to evaluation of dual-wavelength excitation
autofluorescence imaging of colorectal tumours with a high-sensitivity CMOS
imager.
I have issues I would like addressed:
1. 34 and further as the text goes. In order to facilitate comprehension of the
work the group of lesions should be renamed: adenoma/M-ca into
adenoma+M-ca or adenoma and M-ca, SSA/Ps into SSA+Ps or SSA and Ps.
2.34 vs 91 and further as the text goes. In the text both “Ps” and “P” are used,
one variant should be chosen.
3. 36-37. The specimens were irradiated with excitation light at 365 nm and 405
nm, and autofluorescence images were obtained using a new, high-sensitivity
CMOS imager. It is necessary to represent the wavelength in which
autofluorescence registration was performed using high-sensitivity CMOS
imager.
4. 91. The sentence should be written as “adenocarcinoma (M-ca), adenoma,
and sessile serrated adenoma (SSA), polyp (P) specimens”.
5. 101. The study included 98 patients. However, authors indicated that there
were 64 men and 36 women, (n=100).
6. 171. There is misspelling: “u” in the word “florescence” is missed.
7. 220. Literature older than 5 year is 75,7% of given references, thus do not
reflect the realty of modern colon cancer diagnosis (inc. fluorescence diagnosis),
and given statistics may not correspond to up-to-date situation.
Level of interest: An article of outstanding merit and interest 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:Evaluation of dual-wavelength excitation autofluorescence imaging of
colorectal tumours with a high-sensitivity CMOS imager: a cross-sectional study
Version:1Date:9 June 2015
Reviewer: Elena V Filonenko
Reviewer's report:
Minor Essential Revisions (such as missing labels on figures, or the wrong use of
a term, which the author can be trusted to correct).
The manuscript is dedicated to evaluation of dual-wavelength excitation
autofluorescence imaging of colorectal tumours with a high-sensitivity CMOS
imager.
I have issues I would like addressed:
1. 34 and further as the text goes. In order to facilitate comprehension of the
work the group of lesions should be renamed: adenoma/M-ca into
adenoma+M-ca or adenoma and M-ca, SSA/Ps into SSA+Ps or SSA and Ps.
2.34 vs 91 and further as the text goes. In the text both “Ps” and “P” are used,
one variant should be chosen.
3. 36-37. The specimens were irradiated with excitation light at 365 nm and 405
nm, and autofluorescence images were obtained using a new, high-sensitivity
CMOS imager. It is necessary to represent the wavelength in which
autofluorescence registration was performed using high-sensitivity CMOS
imager.
4. 91. The sentence should be written as “adenocarcinoma (M-ca), adenoma,
and sessile serrated adenoma (SSA), polyp (P) specimens”.
5. 101. The study included 98 patients. However, authors indicated that there
were 64 men and 36 women, (n=100).
6. 171. There is misspelling: “u” in the word “florescence” is missed.
7. 220. Literature older than 5 year is 75,7% of given references, thus do not
reflect the realty of modern colon cancer diagnosis (inc. fluorescence diagnosis),
and given statistics may not correspond to up-to-date situation.
Level of interest: An article of outstanding merit and interest 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