Reviewer's report 
 Diagnostic Value of Biochemical Markers (FibroTest-FibroSURE) for the prediction of Liver Title: 
Fibrosis in patients with Non-Alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease 
 1  11 January 2006 Version: Date: 
 Edison Roberto R Parise Reviewer: 
Reviewer's report: 
General 
Since NAFLD affects almost 20% of the general population around the world and the diagnostic can only be made by liver biopsy, non-invasive markers could be extremely helpful, at least for selecting those with more chance of 
having a progressive liver disease for this procedure. According to that, 
the diagnostic performance of FibroTest presented in this manuscript seems 
to be a helpful non-invasive markers for fibrosis evaluation in NAFLD, superior to many already described scores, including BAAT criteria, 
hyaluronic acid, typeIV collagen, laminin and others. 
There is sufficient number of patients and controls for statistical analysis 
and the data are extensively analyzed, with relevant discussion about the 
size of the fragments in liver biopsy. The title and abstract are in 
accordance with the findings and the paper is very well written. 
The disappoint finding is the inability of Fibrotest in differentiating NASH 
from steatosis in NAFLD. 
Although the methodology is well described, in the opposite direction of 
others indexes, (like MELD for instance) the mathematical formula for 
Fibrotest calculation is not provided by the authors what makes difficult 
for the reviewer to agree that this manuscript provided sufficient details 
to replicate the work, as it is asked by the editorial board of BMC Gastroenterology. Anyhow, different authors in chronic hepatitis C have 
utilized Fibrotest with a good reproducibility. 
Therefore, we think that this manuscript can be accepted without revision 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Major Compulsory Revisions (that the author must respond to before a decision on publication can be reached) 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Minor Essential Revisions (such as missing labels on figures, or the wrong use of a term, which the author can be trusted to correct) 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Discretionary Revisions (which the author can choose to ignore) 
 Accept without revision What next?: 
Reviewer's report 
 Diagnostic Value of Biochemical Markers (FibroTest-FibroSURE) for the prediction of Liver Title: 
Fibrosis in patients with Non-Alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease 
 1  11 January 2006 Version: Date: 
 Edison Roberto R Parise Reviewer: 
Reviewer's report: 
General 
Since NAFLD affects almost 20% of the general population around the world and the diagnostic can only be made by liver biopsy, non-invasive markers could be extremely helpful, at least for selecting those with more chance of 
having a progressive liver disease for this procedure. According to that, 
the diagnostic performance of FibroTest presented in this manuscript seems 
to be a helpful non-invasive markers for fibrosis evaluation in NAFLD, superior to many already described scores, including BAAT criteria, 
hyaluronic acid, typeIV collagen, laminin and others. 
There is sufficient number of patients and controls for statistical analysis 
and the data are extensively analyzed, with relevant discussion about the 
size of the fragments in liver biopsy. The title and abstract are in 
accordance with the findings and the paper is very well written. 
The disappoint finding is the inability of Fibrotest in differentiating NASH 
from steatosis in NAFLD. 
Although the methodology is well described, in the opposite direction of 
others indexes, (like MELD for instance) the mathematical formula for 
Fibrotest calculation is not provided by the authors what makes difficult 
for the reviewer to agree that this manuscript provided sufficient details 
to replicate the work, as it is asked by the editorial board of BMC Gastroenterology. Anyhow, different authors in chronic hepatitis C have 
utilized Fibrotest with a good reproducibility. 
Therefore, we think that this manuscript can be accepted without revision 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Major Compulsory Revisions (that the author must respond to before a decision on publication can be reached) 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Minor Essential Revisions (such as missing labels on figures, or the wrong use of a term, which the author can be trusted to correct) 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Discretionary Revisions (which the author can choose to ignore) 
 Accept without revision What next?: 
Please review this paper.
user
Reviewer's report 
 Diagnostic Value of Biochemical Markers (FibroTest-FibroSURE) for the prediction of Liver Title: 
Fibrosis in patients with Non-Alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease 
 1  11 January 2006 Version: Date: 
 Edison Roberto R Parise Reviewer: 
Reviewer's report: 
General 
Since NAFLD affects almost 20% of the general population around the world and the diagnostic can only be made by liver biopsy, non-invasive markers could be extremely helpful, at least for selecting those with more chance of 
having a progressive liver disease for this procedure. According to that, 
the diagnostic performance of FibroTest presented in this manuscript seems 
to be a helpful non-invasive markers for fibrosis evaluation in NAFLD, superior to many already described scores, including BAAT criteria, 
hyaluronic acid, typeIV collagen, laminin and others. 
There is sufficient number of patients and controls for statistical analysis 
and the data are extensively analyzed, with relevant discussion about the 
size of the fragments in liver biopsy. The title and abstract are in 
accordance with the findings and the paper is very well written. 
The disappoint finding is the inability of Fibrotest in differentiating NASH 
from steatosis in NAFLD. 
Although the methodology is well described, in the opposite direction of 
others indexes, (like MELD for instance) the mathematical formula for 
Fibrotest calculation is not provided by the authors what makes difficult 
for the reviewer to agree that this manuscript provided sufficient details 
to replicate the work, as it is asked by the editorial board of BMC Gastroenterology. Anyhow, different authors in chronic hepatitis C have 
utilized Fibrotest with a good reproducibility. 
Therefore, we think that this manuscript can be accepted without revision 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Major Compulsory Revisions (that the author must respond to before a decision on publication can be reached) 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Minor Essential Revisions (such as missing labels on figures, or the wrong use of a term, which the author can be trusted to correct) 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Discretionary Revisions (which the author can choose to ignore) 
 Accept without revision What next?: 
assistant