Reviewer ’s report  
 
Title: Case Report of Patient with Cronkhite -Canada Syndrome: Sustained Remission after 
Treatment with Corticosteroids and Mesalazine  
 
Version: 0 Date: 18 Nov 2018  
 
Reviewer: Ashish K Jha  
 
Reviewer's report:  
 
In this study, the authors described a rare case of Cronkhite -Canada syndrome. Manuscript is 
reasonably well written. There are some concerns regarding the manuscript.  
1. Why mesalazi ne was started? This case had involvement of stomach. What is the possible 
mechanism of pentasa in stomach?  Patient was on steroid too.  
 
1. Polyp size and numbers decreased aborally (Figure 2) (page 4, para 2, sentence 12 -13). 
Authors did not provided ima ges from small bowel. Usual pattern is extensive colonic 
polyposis followed by gastric mucosa hypertrophy ?  
 
2. In discussion, author could have described characteristic endoscopic features of CCS such as 
strawberry polyps, details of intervening mucosa e tc. Author could also have described 
endoscopic differential diagnosis of CCS. Author could also have described 
histopathological differential diagnosis of CCS.  
 
3. Please rewrite conclusion. Patients received steroid too. [Concluding Para - This case 
confir ms the successful application of mesalazine as initially published by Takakura[2] and 
additionally shows the possibility of a quick regression of polyposis, very likely leading to a 
reduced risk of colorectal carcinoma in this at -risk collective. ]  
 
4. Imag e quality is suboptimal.  
Are the methods appropriate and well described?  
If not, please specify what is required in your comments to the authors.  
 
Yes 
 
Does the work include the necessary controls?  
If not, please specify which controls are required in your comments to the authors.  
 
Yes 
  
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the data s hown?  
If not, please explain in your comments to the authors.  
 
No 
 
Are you able to assess any statistics in the manuscript or would you recommend an  
additional statistical review?  
If an additional statistical review is recommended, please specify what aspect s require further  
assessment in your comments to the editors.  
 
Not relevant to this manuscript  
 
Quality of written English  
Please indicate the quality of language in the manuscript:  
 
Acceptable  
 
Declaration of competing interests  
Please complete a declaration of competing interests, considering the following questions:  
 
1. Have you in the past five years received reimbursements, fees, funding, or salary from an  
organisation that may in any way gain or lose financially from the publication of this  
manuscript, eit her now or in the future?  
 
2. Do you hold any stocks or shares in an organisation that may in any way gain or lose  
financially from the publication of this manuscript, either now or in the future?  
 
3. Do you hold or are you currently applying for any patents relating to the content of the  
manuscript?  
 
4. Have you received reimbursements, fees, funding, or salary from an organization that 
holds  or has applied for patents relating to the content of the manuscript?  
 
5. Do you have any other financial competing interests?  
 
6. Do you have any non -financial competing interests in relation to this paper?  
 
If you can answer no to all of the above, write 'I declare that I have no competing interests' 
below.  If you r reply is yes to any, please give details below.  
 
NO 
 
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal. I understand that my name will be included  
on my report to the authors and, if the manuscript is accepted for publication, my named report  
including  any attachments I upload will be posted on the website along with the authors'  
responses. I agree for my report to be made available under an Open Access Creative Commons  
CC-BY license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ). I understand that any c omments  
which I do not wish to be included in my named report can be included as confidential comments  
to the editors, which will not be published.  
 
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal  
Reviewer ’s report  
 
Title: Case Report of Patient with Cronkhite -Canada Syndrome: Sustained Remission after 
Treatment with Corticosteroids and Mesalazine  
 
Version: 0 Date: 18 Nov 2018  
 
Reviewer: Ashish K Jha  
 
Reviewer's report:  
 
In this study, the authors described a rare case of Cronkhite -Canada syndrome. Manuscript is 
reasonably well written. There are some concerns regarding the manuscript.  
1. Why mesalazi ne was started? This case had involvement of stomach. What is the possible 
mechanism of pentasa in stomach?  Patient was on steroid too.  
 
1. Polyp size and numbers decreased aborally (Figure 2) (page 4, para 2, sentence 12 -13). 
Authors did not provided ima ges from small bowel. Usual pattern is extensive colonic 
polyposis followed by gastric mucosa hypertrophy ?  
 
2. In discussion, author could have described characteristic endoscopic features of CCS such as 
strawberry polyps, details of intervening mucosa e tc. Author could also have described 
endoscopic differential diagnosis of CCS. Author could also have described 
histopathological differential diagnosis of CCS.  
 
3. Please rewrite conclusion. Patients received steroid too. [Concluding Para - This case 
confir ms the successful application of mesalazine as initially published by Takakura[2] and 
additionally shows the possibility of a quick regression of polyposis, very likely leading to a 
reduced risk of colorectal carcinoma in this at -risk collective. ]  
 
4. Imag e quality is suboptimal.  
Are the methods appropriate and well described?  
If not, please specify what is required in your comments to the authors.  
 
Yes 
 
Does the work include the necessary controls?  
If not, please specify which controls are required in your comments to the authors.  
 
Yes 
  
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the data s hown?  
If not, please explain in your comments to the authors.  
 
No 
 
Are you able to assess any statistics in the manuscript or would you recommend an  
additional statistical review?  
If an additional statistical review is recommended, please specify what aspect s require further  
assessment in your comments to the editors.  
 
Not relevant to this manuscript  
 
Quality of written English  
Please indicate the quality of language in the manuscript:  
 
Acceptable  
 
Declaration of competing interests  
Please complete a declaration of competing interests, considering the following questions:  
 
1. Have you in the past five years received reimbursements, fees, funding, or salary from an  
organisation that may in any way gain or lose financially from the publication of this  
manuscript, eit her now or in the future?  
 
2. Do you hold any stocks or shares in an organisation that may in any way gain or lose  
financially from the publication of this manuscript, either now or in the future?  
 
3. Do you hold or are you currently applying for any patents relating to the content of the  
manuscript?  
 
4. Have you received reimbursements, fees, funding, or salary from an organization that 
holds  or has applied for patents relating to the content of the manuscript?  
 
5. Do you have any other financial competing interests?  
 
6. Do you have any non -financial competing interests in relation to this paper?  
 
If you can answer no to all of the above, write 'I declare that I have no competing interests' 
below.  If you r reply is yes to any, please give details below.  
 
NO 
 
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal. I understand that my name will be included  
on my report to the authors and, if the manuscript is accepted for publication, my named report  
including  any attachments I upload will be posted on the website along with the authors'  
responses. I agree for my report to be made available under an Open Access Creative Commons  
CC-BY license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ). I understand that any c omments  
which I do not wish to be included in my named report can be included as confidential comments  
to the editors, which will not be published.  
 
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal  
Please review this paper.
user
Reviewer ’s report  
 
Title: Case Report of Patient with Cronkhite -Canada Syndrome: Sustained Remission after 
Treatment with Corticosteroids and Mesalazine  
 
Version: 0 Date: 18 Nov 2018  
 
Reviewer: Ashish K Jha  
 
Reviewer's report:  
 
In this study, the authors described a rare case of Cronkhite -Canada syndrome. Manuscript is 
reasonably well written. There are some concerns regarding the manuscript.  
1. Why mesalazi ne was started? This case had involvement of stomach. What is the possible 
mechanism of pentasa in stomach?  Patient was on steroid too.  
 
1. Polyp size and numbers decreased aborally (Figure 2) (page 4, para 2, sentence 12 -13). 
Authors did not provided ima ges from small bowel. Usual pattern is extensive colonic 
polyposis followed by gastric mucosa hypertrophy ?  
 
2. In discussion, author could have described characteristic endoscopic features of CCS such as 
strawberry polyps, details of intervening mucosa e tc. Author could also have described 
endoscopic differential diagnosis of CCS. Author could also have described 
histopathological differential diagnosis of CCS.  
 
3. Please rewrite conclusion. Patients received steroid too. [Concluding Para - This case 
confir ms the successful application of mesalazine as initially published by Takakura[2] and 
additionally shows the possibility of a quick regression of polyposis, very likely leading to a 
reduced risk of colorectal carcinoma in this at -risk collective. ]  
 
4. Imag e quality is suboptimal.  
Are the methods appropriate and well described?  
If not, please specify what is required in your comments to the authors.  
 
Yes 
 
Does the work include the necessary controls?  
If not, please specify which controls are required in your comments to the authors.  
 
Yes 
  
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the data s hown?  
If not, please explain in your comments to the authors.  
 
No 
 
Are you able to assess any statistics in the manuscript or would you recommend an  
additional statistical review?  
If an additional statistical review is recommended, please specify what aspect s require further  
assessment in your comments to the editors.  
 
Not relevant to this manuscript  
 
Quality of written English  
Please indicate the quality of language in the manuscript:  
 
Acceptable  
 
Declaration of competing interests  
Please complete a declaration of competing interests, considering the following questions:  
 
1. Have you in the past five years received reimbursements, fees, funding, or salary from an  
organisation that may in any way gain or lose financially from the publication of this  
manuscript, eit her now or in the future?  
 
2. Do you hold any stocks or shares in an organisation that may in any way gain or lose  
financially from the publication of this manuscript, either now or in the future?  
 
3. Do you hold or are you currently applying for any patents relating to the content of the  
manuscript?  
 
4. Have you received reimbursements, fees, funding, or salary from an organization that 
holds  or has applied for patents relating to the content of the manuscript?  
 
5. Do you have any other financial competing interests?  
 
6. Do you have any non -financial competing interests in relation to this paper?  
 
If you can answer no to all of the above, write 'I declare that I have no competing interests' 
below.  If you r reply is yes to any, please give details below.  
 
NO 
 
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal. I understand that my name will be included  
on my report to the authors and, if the manuscript is accepted for publication, my named report  
including  any attachments I upload will be posted on the website along with the authors'  
responses. I agree for my report to be made available under an Open Access Creative Commons  
CC-BY license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ). I understand that any c omments  
which I do not wish to be included in my named report can be included as confidential comments  
to the editors, which will not be published.  
 
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal  
assistant