Title: T1/T2 mapping as a non-invasive method for evaluating liver fibrosis based on
correlation of biomarkers: a preclinical study
Version: 3 Date: 23 Jan 2025
Reviewer's report:
Dear Authors,
Thank you to the authors for their contributions in exploring the subject matter. I would like to
express my appreciation for the authors interesting project.
Overall, the article presents valuable findings. It requires minor revisions to address the concerns
before it can be considered for publication.
1. This is a scientific article, and the choice of words is crucial as each word carries significant
meaning. Please explain why the phrases “insufficient accuracy” and “urgent need” were used
in the first sentence of the abstract.
2. The term “liver-related serum biomarkers” covers a wide range of biomarkers. Focusing only
on IL-1, IL-6, and TNF-# to argue that liver-related serum biomarkers have limited accuracy is
too narrow and biased. Please consider revising this sentence to reflect a broader perspective.
3. In the “Imaging analysis” section, some sentences require references. For example, the
sentence “T1 mapping was conducted using the Messroghli equation” needs a corresponding
citation.
4. The Spearman correlation coefficient (#) between HYP content and fibrosis stages is exactly
the same as the # between T1 values and HYP content (0.914). I recommend double-checking
this finding to confirm the exact similarity. Additionally, please ensure the sentences about the
Spearman correlation coefficients between T1 values and fibrosis stages are consistent and unify
the redolent sentences.
5. In the legend of Figure 5, please clarify that the P-values shown in the figure represent the
differences between T1 and T2. Also, direct readers to Table 3 for the corresponding p-values
of each AUROC.
6. As shown in Table 3, the highest AUROC for T1 mapping corresponds to discriminating
between F0-2 and F3-4, which is the key distinction in diagnosing advanced liver fibrosis. Please
highlight this finding more prominently and discuss its significance in the text.
7. In additional file, Table S1, n in 13*n (number of echoes) for TE in T2 mapping and its range
should be clearly defined by the authors to ensure reproducibility, transparency, and accurate
interpretation of the results. States that the echo times were chosen to optimize sampling of the
T2 decay curve. Providing a detailed explanation of how the echo times were calculated and
justified will strengthen the methodology.
8. Again, in Additional File, Table S1, please clarify why the number of slices for T1 and T2
mapping differs. Additionally, could you explain how the exact position of the single T1 slice
was chosen during the MRI scans?
Title: T1/T2 mapping as a non-invasive method for evaluating liver fibrosis based on
correlation of biomarkers: a preclinical study
Version: 3 Date: 23 Jan 2025
Reviewer's report:
Dear Authors,
Thank you to the authors for their contributions in exploring the subject matter. I would like to
express my appreciation for the authors interesting project.
Overall, the article presents valuable findings. It requires minor revisions to address the concerns
before it can be considered for publication.
1. This is a scientific article, and the choice of words is crucial as each word carries significant
meaning. Please explain why the phrases “insufficient accuracy” and “urgent need” were used
in the first sentence of the abstract.
2. The term “liver-related serum biomarkers” covers a wide range of biomarkers. Focusing only
on IL-1, IL-6, and TNF-# to argue that liver-related serum biomarkers have limited accuracy is
too narrow and biased. Please consider revising this sentence to reflect a broader perspective.
3. In the “Imaging analysis” section, some sentences require references. For example, the
sentence “T1 mapping was conducted using the Messroghli equation” needs a corresponding
citation.
4. The Spearman correlation coefficient (#) between HYP content and fibrosis stages is exactly
the same as the # between T1 values and HYP content (0.914). I recommend double-checking
this finding to confirm the exact similarity. Additionally, please ensure the sentences about the
Spearman correlation coefficients between T1 values and fibrosis stages are consistent and unify
the redolent sentences.
5. In the legend of Figure 5, please clarify that the P-values shown in the figure represent the
differences between T1 and T2. Also, direct readers to Table 3 for the corresponding p-values
of each AUROC.
6. As shown in Table 3, the highest AUROC for T1 mapping corresponds to discriminating
between F0-2 and F3-4, which is the key distinction in diagnosing advanced liver fibrosis. Please
highlight this finding more prominently and discuss its significance in the text.
7. In additional file, Table S1, n in 13*n (number of echoes) for TE in T2 mapping and its range
should be clearly defined by the authors to ensure reproducibility, transparency, and accurate
interpretation of the results. States that the echo times were chosen to optimize sampling of the
T2 decay curve. Providing a detailed explanation of how the echo times were calculated and
justified will strengthen the methodology.
8. Again, in Additional File, Table S1, please clarify why the number of slices for T1 and T2
mapping differs. Additionally, could you explain how the exact position of the single T1 slice
was chosen during the MRI scans?
Please review this paper.
user
Title: T1/T2 mapping as a non-invasive method for evaluating liver fibrosis based on
correlation of biomarkers: a preclinical study
Version: 3 Date: 23 Jan 2025
Reviewer's report:
Dear Authors,
Thank you to the authors for their contributions in exploring the subject matter. I would like to
express my appreciation for the authors interesting project.
Overall, the article presents valuable findings. It requires minor revisions to address the concerns
before it can be considered for publication.
1. This is a scientific article, and the choice of words is crucial as each word carries significant
meaning. Please explain why the phrases “insufficient accuracy” and “urgent need” were used
in the first sentence of the abstract.
2. The term “liver-related serum biomarkers” covers a wide range of biomarkers. Focusing only
on IL-1, IL-6, and TNF-# to argue that liver-related serum biomarkers have limited accuracy is
too narrow and biased. Please consider revising this sentence to reflect a broader perspective.
3. In the “Imaging analysis” section, some sentences require references. For example, the
sentence “T1 mapping was conducted using the Messroghli equation” needs a corresponding
citation.
4. The Spearman correlation coefficient (#) between HYP content and fibrosis stages is exactly
the same as the # between T1 values and HYP content (0.914). I recommend double-checking
this finding to confirm the exact similarity. Additionally, please ensure the sentences about the
Spearman correlation coefficients between T1 values and fibrosis stages are consistent and unify
the redolent sentences.
5. In the legend of Figure 5, please clarify that the P-values shown in the figure represent the
differences between T1 and T2. Also, direct readers to Table 3 for the corresponding p-values
of each AUROC.
6. As shown in Table 3, the highest AUROC for T1 mapping corresponds to discriminating
between F0-2 and F3-4, which is the key distinction in diagnosing advanced liver fibrosis. Please
highlight this finding more prominently and discuss its significance in the text.
7. In additional file, Table S1, n in 13*n (number of echoes) for TE in T2 mapping and its range
should be clearly defined by the authors to ensure reproducibility, transparency, and accurate
interpretation of the results. States that the echo times were chosen to optimize sampling of the
T2 decay curve. Providing a detailed explanation of how the echo times were calculated and
justified will strengthen the methodology.
8. Again, in Additional File, Table S1, please clarify why the number of slices for T1 and T2
mapping differs. Additionally, could you explain how the exact position of the single T1 slice
was chosen during the MRI scans?
assistant