Title: Age is the only predictor for upper gastrointestinal malignancy in Chinese patients with
uncomplicated dyspepsia: a prospective investigation of endoscopic findings
Version: 0 Date: 28 Aug 2021
Reviewer's report:
Authors aimed to identify the current risk factors predictive of upper gastrointestinal malignancy
or peptic ulcer in China. However, this study is interesting, authors should concern below points.
Major comments.
1. In this study, H. pylori infection was determined by one of positive outcome of rapid urease
test and histology or 13C urea breath test (UBT). Did authors checked history of H. pylori
eradication therapy? Moreover, why gastric atrophy was not examined? Severity of atrophy,
rather than current status of H. pylori infection is important for gastric carcinogenesis. This is
critical.
2. Were the endoscopists known about the patients undergoing EGD are for this prospective
study. If so, this point may cause a slight bias because doctors investigate more carefully than
usual normal screening.
3. Were the found malignant lesions early or advanced gastric cancer? In cancer therapy,
prognosis is a very important factor. Authors should mention detail of the found malignant
lesions more.
4. Authors concluded that age should be considered as the primary indication for malignancy
in Chinese with uncomplicated dyspepsia regardless of the gender and they suggest that EGD
should be performed at age of 56 to identified upper GI malignancy. Can this conclusion apply
for asymptomatic people? Is screening endoscopy meaningless in people younger than 55?
Conclusion of this manuscript can make mislead. Authors should carefully check this point.]
Minor comments.
1.In page6, authors should carefully check below sentence. ‘In those subjects H. pylori infection
was determined by serology, 13C urea breath test and eradication history.’
Title: Age is the only predictor for upper gastrointestinal malignancy in Chinese patients with
uncomplicated dyspepsia: a prospective investigation of endoscopic findings
Version: 0 Date: 28 Aug 2021
Reviewer's report:
Authors aimed to identify the current risk factors predictive of upper gastrointestinal malignancy
or peptic ulcer in China. However, this study is interesting, authors should concern below points.
Major comments.
1. In this study, H. pylori infection was determined by one of positive outcome of rapid urease
test and histology or 13C urea breath test (UBT). Did authors checked history of H. pylori
eradication therapy? Moreover, why gastric atrophy was not examined? Severity of atrophy,
rather than current status of H. pylori infection is important for gastric carcinogenesis. This is
critical.
2. Were the endoscopists known about the patients undergoing EGD are for this prospective
study. If so, this point may cause a slight bias because doctors investigate more carefully than
usual normal screening.
3. Were the found malignant lesions early or advanced gastric cancer? In cancer therapy,
prognosis is a very important factor. Authors should mention detail of the found malignant
lesions more.
4. Authors concluded that age should be considered as the primary indication for malignancy
in Chinese with uncomplicated dyspepsia regardless of the gender and they suggest that EGD
should be performed at age of 56 to identified upper GI malignancy. Can this conclusion apply
for asymptomatic people? Is screening endoscopy meaningless in people younger than 55?
Conclusion of this manuscript can make mislead. Authors should carefully check this point.]
Minor comments.
1.In page6, authors should carefully check below sentence. ‘In those subjects H. pylori infection
was determined by serology, 13C urea breath test and eradication history.’
Please review this paper.
user
Title: Age is the only predictor for upper gastrointestinal malignancy in Chinese patients with
uncomplicated dyspepsia: a prospective investigation of endoscopic findings
Version: 0 Date: 28 Aug 2021
Reviewer's report:
Authors aimed to identify the current risk factors predictive of upper gastrointestinal malignancy
or peptic ulcer in China. However, this study is interesting, authors should concern below points.
Major comments.
1. In this study, H. pylori infection was determined by one of positive outcome of rapid urease
test and histology or 13C urea breath test (UBT). Did authors checked history of H. pylori
eradication therapy? Moreover, why gastric atrophy was not examined? Severity of atrophy,
rather than current status of H. pylori infection is important for gastric carcinogenesis. This is
critical.
2. Were the endoscopists known about the patients undergoing EGD are for this prospective
study. If so, this point may cause a slight bias because doctors investigate more carefully than
usual normal screening.
3. Were the found malignant lesions early or advanced gastric cancer? In cancer therapy,
prognosis is a very important factor. Authors should mention detail of the found malignant
lesions more.
4. Authors concluded that age should be considered as the primary indication for malignancy
in Chinese with uncomplicated dyspepsia regardless of the gender and they suggest that EGD
should be performed at age of 56 to identified upper GI malignancy. Can this conclusion apply
for asymptomatic people? Is screening endoscopy meaningless in people younger than 55?
Conclusion of this manuscript can make mislead. Authors should carefully check this point.]
Minor comments.
1.In page6, authors should carefully check below sentence. ‘In those subjects H. pylori infection
was determined by serology, 13C urea breath test and eradication history.’
assistant