Reviewer ’s report  
 
Title: Comparison of sequential therapy with standard triple therapy for Helicobacter pylori  
eradication in inactive peptic ulcer disease, and the efficiency of sequential therapy in inactive  
peptic ulcer disease and non -ulcer dyspepsia  
 
Version: 0 Date: 13 Oct 2015  
 
Reviewer: Pin-I Hsu  
 
Reviewer ’s report:  
 
BMGE -D-15-00143  
 
The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy of sequential therapy for H. pylori 
eradication in patients with iDU or NUD in the Taiwanese population.  
 
 
Specific comments are as follows,  
 
1. P3, Abstract: Please clearly show wh ether this study was a prospective or retrospective 
study in the Method section.  
 
2. P4, Abstract: How about the overall comparison results of sequential therapy and 
standard triple therapy (including all patients)? Please show the data in the abstract.  
 
3. P6, lines 11: standard triple therapy use of proton pump inhibitors => standard triple 
therapy using proton pump inhibitor  
 
4. Results: Please perform multivariate analysis to investigate the independent factors 
predicting eradication failure in this study. Was type of disease an independent factor 
determining eradication outcome in this study?  
 
5. Results: How about the antibio tic resistance profile of H pylori strains in this study?  
 
6. Results: Please show the overall comparison results of sequential therapy and standard 
triple therapy in the Result section.  
 
7. Discussion: Please discuss the reason why patients with iDU had a h igher eradication rate 
of sequential therapy than those with non -ulcer dyspepsia.  
 
Are the methods appropriate and well de scribed?  
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 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 re commended, 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:  
 
Needs some language corrections before being published  
 
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 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, e ither 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 relatin g 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 i nterests' 
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 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 comments  
which I do not wish to be included in my named report can be included as confidential comments  
to the editors, which will no t be published.  
 
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal  
Reviewer ’s report  
 
Title: Comparison of sequential therapy with standard triple therapy for Helicobacter pylori  
eradication in inactive peptic ulcer disease, and the efficiency of sequential therapy in inactive  
peptic ulcer disease and non -ulcer dyspepsia  
 
Version: 0 Date: 13 Oct 2015  
 
Reviewer: Pin-I Hsu  
 
Reviewer ’s report:  
 
BMGE -D-15-00143  
 
The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy of sequential therapy for H. pylori 
eradication in patients with iDU or NUD in the Taiwanese population.  
 
 
Specific comments are as follows,  
 
1. P3, Abstract: Please clearly show wh ether this study was a prospective or retrospective 
study in the Method section.  
 
2. P4, Abstract: How about the overall comparison results of sequential therapy and 
standard triple therapy (including all patients)? Please show the data in the abstract.  
 
3. P6, lines 11: standard triple therapy use of proton pump inhibitors => standard triple 
therapy using proton pump inhibitor  
 
4. Results: Please perform multivariate analysis to investigate the independent factors 
predicting eradication failure in this study. Was type of disease an independent factor 
determining eradication outcome in this study?  
 
5. Results: How about the antibio tic resistance profile of H pylori strains in this study?  
 
6. Results: Please show the overall comparison results of sequential therapy and standard 
triple therapy in the Result section.  
 
7. Discussion: Please discuss the reason why patients with iDU had a h igher eradication rate 
of sequential therapy than those with non -ulcer dyspepsia.  
 
Are the methods appropriate and well de scribed?  
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 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 re commended, 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:  
 
Needs some language corrections before being published  
 
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 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, e ither 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 relatin g 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 i nterests' 
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 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 comments  
which I do not wish to be included in my named report can be included as confidential comments  
to the editors, which will no t be published.  
 
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal  
Please review this paper.
user
Reviewer ’s report  
 
Title: Comparison of sequential therapy with standard triple therapy for Helicobacter pylori  
eradication in inactive peptic ulcer disease, and the efficiency of sequential therapy in inactive  
peptic ulcer disease and non -ulcer dyspepsia  
 
Version: 0 Date: 13 Oct 2015  
 
Reviewer: Pin-I Hsu  
 
Reviewer ’s report:  
 
BMGE -D-15-00143  
 
The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy of sequential therapy for H. pylori 
eradication in patients with iDU or NUD in the Taiwanese population.  
 
 
Specific comments are as follows,  
 
1. P3, Abstract: Please clearly show wh ether this study was a prospective or retrospective 
study in the Method section.  
 
2. P4, Abstract: How about the overall comparison results of sequential therapy and 
standard triple therapy (including all patients)? Please show the data in the abstract.  
 
3. P6, lines 11: standard triple therapy use of proton pump inhibitors => standard triple 
therapy using proton pump inhibitor  
 
4. Results: Please perform multivariate analysis to investigate the independent factors 
predicting eradication failure in this study. Was type of disease an independent factor 
determining eradication outcome in this study?  
 
5. Results: How about the antibio tic resistance profile of H pylori strains in this study?  
 
6. Results: Please show the overall comparison results of sequential therapy and standard 
triple therapy in the Result section.  
 
7. Discussion: Please discuss the reason why patients with iDU had a h igher eradication rate 
of sequential therapy than those with non -ulcer dyspepsia.  
 
Are the methods appropriate and well de scribed?  
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 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 re commended, 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:  
 
Needs some language corrections before being published  
 
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 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, e ither 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 relatin g 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 i nterests' 
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 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 comments  
which I do not wish to be included in my named report can be included as confidential comments  
to the editors, which will no t be published.  
 
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal  
assistant