Title: Cyclin-Dependent Kinase 19 Upregulation Correlates with an Unfavorable Prognosis in
Hepatocellular Carcinoma
Version: 3 Date: 28 Jul 2021
Reviewer's report:
In this study, the authors gave a general introduction of a component of the Mediator co-activator
complex, cyclin-dependent kinase 19 (CDK19) and its prognostic value in hepatocellular
carcinoma (HCC). Although CDK19 may not have been investigated in HCC, CDK19 has been
studied in depth in several cancer types. In my opinion, therefore, this study lacks originality. In
the Discussion section, the author raised three scientific questions. Firstly, what is the potential
mechanism of CDK19 in HCC? Secondly, what mutations of CDK19 occur in HCC? Do
these mutations have a relationship with the prognosis? And finally, is CDK19 involved in the
pathological process of HCC through immune infiltration? These questions were not specific
and no hypothesis were provided to answer them, which makes it difficult to evaluate whether
the methods used in this study were appropriate.
There are also several issues in regard of the construction of the study and the article:
1. Although the language was overall comprehensible, there were typos, grammatical errors and
redundancies.
2. Proof read should be conducted as there were incomplete sentences in the article. For example,
line 331-332 “CDK19 is in a positive correlation with in immune infiltrates in.”
3. Fact check should be made to make sure that references were cited accurately. For example,
previous reports hardly indicated that Sorafenib is a molecular inhibitor of CDK19.
4. Methods described regarding the wet-bench experiments are questionable. For instance, for
the cell proliferation assay, the authors stated that 10000 cells were seeded per well in a 96#well
plate. This cell number is 10 times the amount compared to the most widely used protocol. It
would be difficult to get a reliable read with that many cells in a well.
5. SK-Hep-1 cell line is not recommended as it is a liver adenocarcinoma cell line.
Taken together, it is my opinion that there are fundamental issues in this study that cannot
be addressed. I therefore do not recommend further consideration for publication in BMC
Gastroenterology.
Title: Cyclin-Dependent Kinase 19 Upregulation Correlates with an Unfavorable Prognosis in
Hepatocellular Carcinoma
Version: 3 Date: 28 Jul 2021
Reviewer's report:
In this study, the authors gave a general introduction of a component of the Mediator co-activator
complex, cyclin-dependent kinase 19 (CDK19) and its prognostic value in hepatocellular
carcinoma (HCC). Although CDK19 may not have been investigated in HCC, CDK19 has been
studied in depth in several cancer types. In my opinion, therefore, this study lacks originality. In
the Discussion section, the author raised three scientific questions. Firstly, what is the potential
mechanism of CDK19 in HCC? Secondly, what mutations of CDK19 occur in HCC? Do
these mutations have a relationship with the prognosis? And finally, is CDK19 involved in the
pathological process of HCC through immune infiltration? These questions were not specific
and no hypothesis were provided to answer them, which makes it difficult to evaluate whether
the methods used in this study were appropriate.
There are also several issues in regard of the construction of the study and the article:
1. Although the language was overall comprehensible, there were typos, grammatical errors and
redundancies.
2. Proof read should be conducted as there were incomplete sentences in the article. For example,
line 331-332 “CDK19 is in a positive correlation with in immune infiltrates in.”
3. Fact check should be made to make sure that references were cited accurately. For example,
previous reports hardly indicated that Sorafenib is a molecular inhibitor of CDK19.
4. Methods described regarding the wet-bench experiments are questionable. For instance, for
the cell proliferation assay, the authors stated that 10000 cells were seeded per well in a 96#well
plate. This cell number is 10 times the amount compared to the most widely used protocol. It
would be difficult to get a reliable read with that many cells in a well.
5. SK-Hep-1 cell line is not recommended as it is a liver adenocarcinoma cell line.
Taken together, it is my opinion that there are fundamental issues in this study that cannot
be addressed. I therefore do not recommend further consideration for publication in BMC
Gastroenterology.
Please review this paper.
user
Title: Cyclin-Dependent Kinase 19 Upregulation Correlates with an Unfavorable Prognosis in
Hepatocellular Carcinoma
Version: 3 Date: 28 Jul 2021
Reviewer's report:
In this study, the authors gave a general introduction of a component of the Mediator co-activator
complex, cyclin-dependent kinase 19 (CDK19) and its prognostic value in hepatocellular
carcinoma (HCC). Although CDK19 may not have been investigated in HCC, CDK19 has been
studied in depth in several cancer types. In my opinion, therefore, this study lacks originality. In
the Discussion section, the author raised three scientific questions. Firstly, what is the potential
mechanism of CDK19 in HCC? Secondly, what mutations of CDK19 occur in HCC? Do
these mutations have a relationship with the prognosis? And finally, is CDK19 involved in the
pathological process of HCC through immune infiltration? These questions were not specific
and no hypothesis were provided to answer them, which makes it difficult to evaluate whether
the methods used in this study were appropriate.
There are also several issues in regard of the construction of the study and the article:
1. Although the language was overall comprehensible, there were typos, grammatical errors and
redundancies.
2. Proof read should be conducted as there were incomplete sentences in the article. For example,
line 331-332 “CDK19 is in a positive correlation with in immune infiltrates in.”
3. Fact check should be made to make sure that references were cited accurately. For example,
previous reports hardly indicated that Sorafenib is a molecular inhibitor of CDK19.
4. Methods described regarding the wet-bench experiments are questionable. For instance, for
the cell proliferation assay, the authors stated that 10000 cells were seeded per well in a 96#well
plate. This cell number is 10 times the amount compared to the most widely used protocol. It
would be difficult to get a reliable read with that many cells in a well.
5. SK-Hep-1 cell line is not recommended as it is a liver adenocarcinoma cell line.
Taken together, it is my opinion that there are fundamental issues in this study that cannot
be addressed. I therefore do not recommend further consideration for publication in BMC
Gastroenterology.
assistant