Reviewer ’s report  
 
Title:  Demographic, clinical, and pathological features of early onset pancreatic cancer patients  
 
Version: 0 Date: 18 Jun 2018 
 
Reviewer:  Sundeep  Lakhtakia  
 
Reviewer’s report:  
 
In this well written article titled "Demographic, clinical, and pathological features of early onset 
pancreatic cancer patients", the authors from pathology department concluded in a retrospective 
cohort collecte d over 11 years that the early onset Pancreatic Cancer (EOPC) subjects were more 
likely to be male, presented with more advanced disease, received more aggressive treatment, 
and had on overall similar survival outcome compared to adult cohorts.  
 
 
My comments  are as follows:  
 
1. Like in any retrospective study, it is possible that some subjects who were not labelled as 
per search guidelines may have been missed in cohort.  
 
2. Since this is an expert centre, some of the subjects who had diagnosis established at 
another centre and were referred only for consult, or medical treatment, or those who did 
not undergo any intervention to provide pathology specimen may have been excluded and 
can skew the results & interpretations. Pl discuss & add in discussion.  
 
3. It is not clear whether the palliative chemo - RT was given prior to surgery.  
 
4. Page 10. Line 26. The word significant from 'significant smoking history' may be 
excluded as smoking was only descriptive in inclusion.  
 
5. Page 9, line52. Ref 27 to come at end of s entence. And page 10, line 15 ref 27 comes 
twice.  
 
Are the methods appropriate and well described?  
If not, please specify what is required in your comments to the au thors.  
 
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 shown?  
If not, please explain in your comments to the authors.  
 
Yes 
 
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 aspects require further 
assessment in your comments to the editors.  
 
I am able to assess the statistics  
 
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, either now or in t he 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 your reply is yes to any, please give details below.  
 
I declare that I have no competing interests.  
 
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 alon g 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 comments 
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:  Demographic, clinical, and pathological features of early onset pancreatic cancer patients  
 
Version: 0 Date: 18 Jun 2018 
 
Reviewer:  Sundeep  Lakhtakia  
 
Reviewer’s report:  
 
In this well written article titled "Demographic, clinical, and pathological features of early onset 
pancreatic cancer patients", the authors from pathology department concluded in a retrospective 
cohort collecte d over 11 years that the early onset Pancreatic Cancer (EOPC) subjects were more 
likely to be male, presented with more advanced disease, received more aggressive treatment, 
and had on overall similar survival outcome compared to adult cohorts.  
 
 
My comments  are as follows:  
 
1. Like in any retrospective study, it is possible that some subjects who were not labelled as 
per search guidelines may have been missed in cohort.  
 
2. Since this is an expert centre, some of the subjects who had diagnosis established at 
another centre and were referred only for consult, or medical treatment, or those who did 
not undergo any intervention to provide pathology specimen may have been excluded and 
can skew the results & interpretations. Pl discuss & add in discussion.  
 
3. It is not clear whether the palliative chemo - RT was given prior to surgery.  
 
4. Page 10. Line 26. The word significant from 'significant smoking history' may be 
excluded as smoking was only descriptive in inclusion.  
 
5. Page 9, line52. Ref 27 to come at end of s entence. And page 10, line 15 ref 27 comes 
twice.  
 
Are the methods appropriate and well described?  
If not, please specify what is required in your comments to the au thors.  
 
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 shown?  
If not, please explain in your comments to the authors.  
 
Yes 
 
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 aspects require further 
assessment in your comments to the editors.  
 
I am able to assess the statistics  
 
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, either now or in t he 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 your reply is yes to any, please give details below.  
 
I declare that I have no competing interests.  
 
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 alon g 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 comments 
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:  Demographic, clinical, and pathological features of early onset pancreatic cancer patients  
 
Version: 0 Date: 18 Jun 2018 
 
Reviewer:  Sundeep  Lakhtakia  
 
Reviewer’s report:  
 
In this well written article titled "Demographic, clinical, and pathological features of early onset 
pancreatic cancer patients", the authors from pathology department concluded in a retrospective 
cohort collecte d over 11 years that the early onset Pancreatic Cancer (EOPC) subjects were more 
likely to be male, presented with more advanced disease, received more aggressive treatment, 
and had on overall similar survival outcome compared to adult cohorts.  
 
 
My comments  are as follows:  
 
1. Like in any retrospective study, it is possible that some subjects who were not labelled as 
per search guidelines may have been missed in cohort.  
 
2. Since this is an expert centre, some of the subjects who had diagnosis established at 
another centre and were referred only for consult, or medical treatment, or those who did 
not undergo any intervention to provide pathology specimen may have been excluded and 
can skew the results & interpretations. Pl discuss & add in discussion.  
 
3. It is not clear whether the palliative chemo - RT was given prior to surgery.  
 
4. Page 10. Line 26. The word significant from 'significant smoking history' may be 
excluded as smoking was only descriptive in inclusion.  
 
5. Page 9, line52. Ref 27 to come at end of s entence. And page 10, line 15 ref 27 comes 
twice.  
 
Are the methods appropriate and well described?  
If not, please specify what is required in your comments to the au thors.  
 
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 shown?  
If not, please explain in your comments to the authors.  
 
Yes 
 
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 aspects require further 
assessment in your comments to the editors.  
 
I am able to assess the statistics  
 
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, either now or in t he 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 your reply is yes to any, please give details below.  
 
I declare that I have no competing interests.  
 
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 alon g 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 comments 
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