Title: Sevoflurane inhibits cholangiocarcinoma via Wnt/#-catenin Signaling pathway
Version: 1 Date: 30 May 2023
Reviewer's report:
PEER REVIEWER ASSESSMENTS:
OBJECTIVE - Full research articles: is there a clear objective that addresses a testable research
question(s) (brief or other article types: is there a clear objective)?
Yes - there is a clear objective
DESIGN - Is the current approach (including controls and analysis protocols) appropriate for
the objective?
Yes - the approach is appropriate
EXECUTION - Are the experiments and analyses performed with technical rigor to allow
confidence in the results?
Yes - experiments and analyses were performed appropriately
STATISTICS - Is the use of statistics in the manuscript appropriate?
Yes - appropriate statistical analyses have been used in the study
INTERPRETATION - Is the current interpretation/discussion of the results reasonable and not
overstated?
Yes - the author's interpretation is reasonable
OVERALL MANUSCRIPT POTENTIAL - Is the current version of this work technically
sound? If not, can revisions be made to make the work technically sound?
Probably - with minor revisions
PEER REVIEWER COMMENTS:
GENERAL COMMENTS: The study has been executed in a systematic and scientific manner.
ADDITIONAL REQUESTS/SUGGESTIONS:
1) Why did the authors select the concentration of Sevoflurane as 1.7%, 3.4%, and 5.1% initially
and on what basis was the concentration of 3.4% finalized for the remaining studies?
2) Include magnification or scale bar in images.
Title: Sevoflurane inhibits cholangiocarcinoma via Wnt/#-catenin Signaling pathway
Version: 1 Date: 30 May 2023
Reviewer's report:
PEER REVIEWER ASSESSMENTS:
OBJECTIVE - Full research articles: is there a clear objective that addresses a testable research
question(s) (brief or other article types: is there a clear objective)?
Yes - there is a clear objective
DESIGN - Is the current approach (including controls and analysis protocols) appropriate for
the objective?
Yes - the approach is appropriate
EXECUTION - Are the experiments and analyses performed with technical rigor to allow
confidence in the results?
Yes - experiments and analyses were performed appropriately
STATISTICS - Is the use of statistics in the manuscript appropriate?
Yes - appropriate statistical analyses have been used in the study
INTERPRETATION - Is the current interpretation/discussion of the results reasonable and not
overstated?
Yes - the author's interpretation is reasonable
OVERALL MANUSCRIPT POTENTIAL - Is the current version of this work technically
sound? If not, can revisions be made to make the work technically sound?
Probably - with minor revisions
PEER REVIEWER COMMENTS:
GENERAL COMMENTS: The study has been executed in a systematic and scientific manner.
ADDITIONAL REQUESTS/SUGGESTIONS:
1) Why did the authors select the concentration of Sevoflurane as 1.7%, 3.4%, and 5.1% initially
and on what basis was the concentration of 3.4% finalized for the remaining studies?
2) Include magnification or scale bar in images.
Please review this paper.
user
Title: Sevoflurane inhibits cholangiocarcinoma via Wnt/#-catenin Signaling pathway
Version: 1 Date: 30 May 2023
Reviewer's report:
PEER REVIEWER ASSESSMENTS:
OBJECTIVE - Full research articles: is there a clear objective that addresses a testable research
question(s) (brief or other article types: is there a clear objective)?
Yes - there is a clear objective
DESIGN - Is the current approach (including controls and analysis protocols) appropriate for
the objective?
Yes - the approach is appropriate
EXECUTION - Are the experiments and analyses performed with technical rigor to allow
confidence in the results?
Yes - experiments and analyses were performed appropriately
STATISTICS - Is the use of statistics in the manuscript appropriate?
Yes - appropriate statistical analyses have been used in the study
INTERPRETATION - Is the current interpretation/discussion of the results reasonable and not
overstated?
Yes - the author's interpretation is reasonable
OVERALL MANUSCRIPT POTENTIAL - Is the current version of this work technically
sound? If not, can revisions be made to make the work technically sound?
Probably - with minor revisions
PEER REVIEWER COMMENTS:
GENERAL COMMENTS: The study has been executed in a systematic and scientific manner.
ADDITIONAL REQUESTS/SUGGESTIONS:
1) Why did the authors select the concentration of Sevoflurane as 1.7%, 3.4%, and 5.1% initially
and on what basis was the concentration of 3.4% finalized for the remaining studies?
2) Include magnification or scale bar in images.
assistant