Reviewer's report
Title:CD44/CD24 Expression in Recurrent Gastric Cancer: A Retrospective
Analysis
Version: 1Date:17 April 2012
Reviewer: Neil Merrett
Reviewer's report:
Useful paper looking at CD44 and CD24 expression in gastric cancer attempting
to identify whether this expression may be a prognositc indicator based on
retrospective analysis of patients with gastric cancer compatring those with
recurrence after surgery to those without recurrence. Although a negative study,
it adds to our overall understanding of the disease
Minor essential revisions
1. Methods abstract is very confusing. My understanding is that of the 500
patients who had a curative resection, 95 had recurrence. Twenty patients from
the non recurrence group (405patients) and twenty from the recurrence group
(95patients) were randomly chosen. This should be made much clearer
2. It would be useful to know what was the minimum disease free timescale for
the patients chosen without recurrence. Obviously if it is 6mths, this may be
problematic, whereas the validity of using patients with a minimum of 3 or 5 yrs
disease free survival in the control group would be far more significant
3. Which edition of AJCC staging was used for the tumours. I would assume 7th,
but this must be clarified.
4.1st paragraph of discussion is simply a repeat of te results and should be
placed there
5. Needs better use of paragraphs in the discussion
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a
statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests
Reviewer's report
Title:CD44/CD24 Expression in Recurrent Gastric Cancer: A Retrospective
Analysis
Version: 1Date:17 April 2012
Reviewer: Neil Merrett
Reviewer's report:
Useful paper looking at CD44 and CD24 expression in gastric cancer attempting
to identify whether this expression may be a prognositc indicator based on
retrospective analysis of patients with gastric cancer compatring those with
recurrence after surgery to those without recurrence. Although a negative study,
it adds to our overall understanding of the disease
Minor essential revisions
1. Methods abstract is very confusing. My understanding is that of the 500
patients who had a curative resection, 95 had recurrence. Twenty patients from
the non recurrence group (405patients) and twenty from the recurrence group
(95patients) were randomly chosen. This should be made much clearer
2. It would be useful to know what was the minimum disease free timescale for
the patients chosen without recurrence. Obviously if it is 6mths, this may be
problematic, whereas the validity of using patients with a minimum of 3 or 5 yrs
disease free survival in the control group would be far more significant
3. Which edition of AJCC staging was used for the tumours. I would assume 7th,
but this must be clarified.
4.1st paragraph of discussion is simply a repeat of te results and should be
placed there
5. Needs better use of paragraphs in the discussion
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a
statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests
Please review this paper.
user
Reviewer's report
Title:CD44/CD24 Expression in Recurrent Gastric Cancer: A Retrospective
Analysis
Version: 1Date:17 April 2012
Reviewer: Neil Merrett
Reviewer's report:
Useful paper looking at CD44 and CD24 expression in gastric cancer attempting
to identify whether this expression may be a prognositc indicator based on
retrospective analysis of patients with gastric cancer compatring those with
recurrence after surgery to those without recurrence. Although a negative study,
it adds to our overall understanding of the disease
Minor essential revisions
1. Methods abstract is very confusing. My understanding is that of the 500
patients who had a curative resection, 95 had recurrence. Twenty patients from
the non recurrence group (405patients) and twenty from the recurrence group
(95patients) were randomly chosen. This should be made much clearer
2. It would be useful to know what was the minimum disease free timescale for
the patients chosen without recurrence. Obviously if it is 6mths, this may be
problematic, whereas the validity of using patients with a minimum of 3 or 5 yrs
disease free survival in the control group would be far more significant
3. Which edition of AJCC staging was used for the tumours. I would assume 7th,
but this must be clarified.
4.1st paragraph of discussion is simply a repeat of te results and should be
placed there
5. Needs better use of paragraphs in the discussion
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a
statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests
assistant