Reviewer ’s report  
Title:  Fecal calprotectin level correlated with both endoscopic severity and disease extent in 
ulcerative colitis  
 
Version:  0 Date:  15 Dec 2015  
 
Reviewer:  Piotr  Eder  
 
Reviewer's report:  
This is a well -written paper on the utility of FC in the assessment of endoscopic activity of 
ulcerative colitis and the extent of th e disease. Although the subject has been thoroughly 
investigated so far, the current study brings some new data especially in terms of the relation 
between extent of the disease and FC. The results of the study are clearly presented and the 
conclusions are  drawn adequately to the data obtained in the analysis. What is very important, 
the authors are critical to some aspects of their study, what is presented in the discussion section.  
The most interesting finding is that FC correlates with S -MES even in UC p atients with the same 
M-MES values.  
The authors, however, did not perform other analysis, which could be, in my opinion, also very 
interesting. Namely, it could be of a great interest to check FC levels in patients with the same S -
MES, but different disea se extent. This would allow to additionally assess, if FC level is more 
related to disease activity or its extent. For example - we could have a patient with mild UC 
activity in descending, sigmoid colon and the rectum (S -MES = 1+1+1= 3 points) and another  
patient with severe activity but only in the rectum (S -MES = 3 points). Are FC levels comparable 
in those patients, as S -MES values are identical, or maybe the patients with higher disease 
activity or patients with greater disease extent would have higher  FC levels???  
Another comment - please provide some biochemical results of the study group (CRP, blood cell 
count...). This would improve the characteristics of your patients.  
 
Are the methods appropriate and well described?  
If not, please specify what is re quired 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.  
Unable to assess  
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 fu rther 
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 complet e a declaration of competing interests, considering the following questions:  
1. Have you in the past five years received reimbursements, f ees, 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 t hat 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 comp eting interests' 
below. If your reply is yes to any, please give details below.  
I received lecture fees from Abbvie Poland.  
Otherwise, I decalare 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 avai lable 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 wil l not be published.  
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal  
Reviewer ’s report  
Title:  Fecal calprotectin level correlated with both endoscopic severity and disease extent in 
ulcerative colitis  
 
Version:  0 Date:  15 Dec 2015  
 
Reviewer:  Piotr  Eder  
 
Reviewer's report:  
This is a well -written paper on the utility of FC in the assessment of endoscopic activity of 
ulcerative colitis and the extent of th e disease. Although the subject has been thoroughly 
investigated so far, the current study brings some new data especially in terms of the relation 
between extent of the disease and FC. The results of the study are clearly presented and the 
conclusions are  drawn adequately to the data obtained in the analysis. What is very important, 
the authors are critical to some aspects of their study, what is presented in the discussion section.  
The most interesting finding is that FC correlates with S -MES even in UC p atients with the same 
M-MES values.  
The authors, however, did not perform other analysis, which could be, in my opinion, also very 
interesting. Namely, it could be of a great interest to check FC levels in patients with the same S -
MES, but different disea se extent. This would allow to additionally assess, if FC level is more 
related to disease activity or its extent. For example - we could have a patient with mild UC 
activity in descending, sigmoid colon and the rectum (S -MES = 1+1+1= 3 points) and another  
patient with severe activity but only in the rectum (S -MES = 3 points). Are FC levels comparable 
in those patients, as S -MES values are identical, or maybe the patients with higher disease 
activity or patients with greater disease extent would have higher  FC levels???  
Another comment - please provide some biochemical results of the study group (CRP, blood cell 
count...). This would improve the characteristics of your patients.  
 
Are the methods appropriate and well described?  
If not, please specify what is re quired 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.  
Unable to assess  
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 fu rther 
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 complet e a declaration of competing interests, considering the following questions:  
1. Have you in the past five years received reimbursements, f ees, 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 t hat 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 comp eting interests' 
below. If your reply is yes to any, please give details below.  
I received lecture fees from Abbvie Poland.  
Otherwise, I decalare 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 avai lable 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 wil l not be published.  
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal  
Please review this paper.
user
Reviewer ’s report  
Title:  Fecal calprotectin level correlated with both endoscopic severity and disease extent in 
ulcerative colitis  
 
Version:  0 Date:  15 Dec 2015  
 
Reviewer:  Piotr  Eder  
 
Reviewer's report:  
This is a well -written paper on the utility of FC in the assessment of endoscopic activity of 
ulcerative colitis and the extent of th e disease. Although the subject has been thoroughly 
investigated so far, the current study brings some new data especially in terms of the relation 
between extent of the disease and FC. The results of the study are clearly presented and the 
conclusions are  drawn adequately to the data obtained in the analysis. What is very important, 
the authors are critical to some aspects of their study, what is presented in the discussion section.  
The most interesting finding is that FC correlates with S -MES even in UC p atients with the same 
M-MES values.  
The authors, however, did not perform other analysis, which could be, in my opinion, also very 
interesting. Namely, it could be of a great interest to check FC levels in patients with the same S -
MES, but different disea se extent. This would allow to additionally assess, if FC level is more 
related to disease activity or its extent. For example - we could have a patient with mild UC 
activity in descending, sigmoid colon and the rectum (S -MES = 1+1+1= 3 points) and another  
patient with severe activity but only in the rectum (S -MES = 3 points). Are FC levels comparable 
in those patients, as S -MES values are identical, or maybe the patients with higher disease 
activity or patients with greater disease extent would have higher  FC levels???  
Another comment - please provide some biochemical results of the study group (CRP, blood cell 
count...). This would improve the characteristics of your patients.  
 
Are the methods appropriate and well described?  
If not, please specify what is re quired 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.  
Unable to assess  
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 fu rther 
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 complet e a declaration of competing interests, considering the following questions:  
1. Have you in the past five years received reimbursements, f ees, 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 t hat 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 comp eting interests' 
below. If your reply is yes to any, please give details below.  
I received lecture fees from Abbvie Poland.  
Otherwise, I decalare 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 avai lable 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 wil l not be published.  
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal  
assistant