Submited on: 05 Mar 2013 10:04:10 AM GMT
Published on: 05 Mar 2013 12:32:39 PM GMT
 
Biomarkers of Breast Cell Lines
Posted by Dr. William J Maloney on 12 Jun 2014 05:56:01 PM GMT Reviewed by Interested Peers

  • What are the main claims of the paper and how important are they?

    The purpose of this article is to describe the results of a pilot study concerning human breast cancer.


  • Are these claims novel? If not, please specify papers that weaken the claims to the originality of this one.

    Yes


  • Are the claims properly placed in the context of the previous literature?

    Yes


  • Do the results support the claims? If not, what other evidence is required?

    Yes


  • If a protocol is provided, for example for a randomized controlled trial, are there any important deviations from it? If so, have the authors explained adequately why the deviations occurred?

    No


  • Is the methodology valid? Does the paper offer enough details of its methodology that its experiments or its analyses could be reproduced?

    Yes


  • Would any other experiments or additional information improve the paper? How much better would the paper be if this extra work was done, and how difficult would such work be to do, or to provide?

    No


  • Is this paper outstanding in its discipline? (For example, would you like to see this work presented in a seminar at your hospital or university? Do you feel these results need to be incorporated in your next general lecture on the subject?) If yes, what makes it outstanding? If not, why not?

    Yes- It would be a great lecture at a medical conference.


  • Other Comments:

    The author provides an excellent article. The author states that the aim of the study was to identify classes of metabolites which are associated with the development of breast tumour phenotype in the cell lines. He thoroughly describes his methodology in the materials and methods section. Insightful figures are also provided. The author suggests that the findings of this study be further validated by tandem mass spectrometry.

  • Competing interests:
    None
  • Invited by the author to review this article? :
    No
  • Have you previously published on this or a similar topic?:
    No
  • References:

    None

  • Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:

    Clinical associate professor

  • How to cite:  Maloney W J.Biomarkers of Breast Cell Lines[Review of the article 'Biomarkers of Breast Cancer Cell Lines A; Pilot Study on Human Breast Cancer Metabolomics ' by Syed S].WebmedCentral 2013;5(6):WMCRW003073
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse
 

  • What are the main claims of the paper and how important are they?

    Main claim: Identification of classes of metabolites that are associated with the development of breast tumour phenotype in the breast cancer cell lines, MCF-7,  MDA-MB-231,and MCF-10A. Profiling a wide range of metabolites in cultured breast epithelial cell lines by using novel extraction methods, and application of liquid chromatography/mass spectrometry techniques to determine metabolite profiles.

     

    I find the study important.

     


  • Are these claims novel? If not, please specify papers that weaken the claims to the originality of this one.

    The idea of collecting candidate biomarkers by using cancer cell lines against to normal control is a common application in biomarker research. The author added novel extraction technique, rare used breast cancer cell line to a control. The techniques are clear and selection of candidates are appropriate.

    ADVANCED STAGE PUBLiCATiON EXAMPLE: Philos Transact A Math Phys Eng Sci. 2012 May 28;370(1967):2433-47. doi:10.1098/rsta.2011.0444.

    Monitoring the progression of metastatic breast cancer on nanoporous silica chips.

    Fan J, Deng X, Gallagher JW, Huang H, Huang Y, Wen J, Ferrari M, Shen H, Hu Y.

    Department of Nanomedicine, The Methodist Hospital Research Institute, Houston, TX 77030, USA.

    PROTEOMC PUBLICATION EXAMPLE-

    Cell Physiol Biochem. 2007;20(5):579-90. Profiling of apoptotic changes in human breast cancer cells using SELDI-TOF mass spectrometry. Leong S, Christopherson RI, Baxter RC.

    Kolling Institute of Medical Research, The University of Sydney, Royal North Shore Hospital, Sydney, Australia. sleong@med.usyd.edu.au


  • Are the claims properly placed in the context of the previous literature?

    Yes


  • Do the results support the claims? If not, what other evidence is required?

    Yes


  • If a protocol is provided, for example for a randomized controlled trial, are there any important deviations from it? If so, have the authors explained adequately why the deviations occurred?

    Yes


  • Is the methodology valid? Does the paper offer enough details of its methodology that its experiments or its analyses could be reproduced?

    Yes


  • Would any other experiments or additional information improve the paper? How much better would the paper be if this extra work was done, and how difficult would such work be to do, or to provide?

    Weakness of the paper:

    Spelling errors-i.e., metaboites, metabolites-page 5/25,

    punctuation errors,Tocompare-page 8/25, cellline-page 9/25.

    References-Which reference style you have used? Please see references-3,5,11, and 12.

    1. Inconsistent ref style
    2. Please follow APA style both inside the text, and at your list
    3. If you copied your ref. from somewhere be sure that you cleaned the stars (ref.12)


  • Is this paper outstanding in its discipline? (For example, would you like to see this work presented in a seminar at your hospital or university? Do you feel these results need to be incorporated in your next general lecture on the subject?) If yes, what makes it outstanding? If not, why not?

    It is good, but not outstanding.


  • Other Comments:

    None

  • Competing interests:
    None
  • Invited by the author to review this article? :
    No
  • Have you previously published on this or a similar topic?:
    Yes
  • References:

    It is can be related to biomarker study paper, which I have published at 2004. I am in the field since that date.

  • Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:
    None
  • How to cite:  Guzey M .Biomarkers of Breast Cancer Cell Lines A; Pilot Study on Human Breast Cancer Metabolomics[Review of the article 'Biomarkers of Breast Cancer Cell Lines A; Pilot Study on Human Breast Cancer Metabolomics ' by Syed S].WebmedCentral 2013;4(4):WMCRW002671
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse
 

  • What are the main claims of the paper and how important are they?

    The identification of novel biomarkers of breast cancer cells


  • Are these claims novel? If not, please specify papers that weaken the claims to the originality of this one.

    Yes


  • Are the claims properly placed in the context of the previous literature?

    Yes


  • Do the results support the claims? If not, what other evidence is required?

    Yes


  • If a protocol is provided, for example for a randomized controlled trial, are there any important deviations from it? If so, have the authors explained adequately why the deviations occurred?

    Yes


  • Is the methodology valid? Does the paper offer enough details of its methodology that its experiments or its analyses could be reproduced?

    Yes


  • Would any other experiments or additional information improve the paper? How much better would the paper be if this extra work was done, and how difficult would such work be to do, or to provide?

    For the improvement of the experimental design I would suggest to increase the  number of cell lines. Authors included one line of normal cells (mcf-10a), one line of the luminal A subtype  (mcf-7) and one line of the claudin-low subtype (mda-mb-231). Authors could include lines belonging to other subtypes (luminal B, HER2, basal,...), then they could find interesting differences among tumoral cells vs normal cells and even among the different subtypes. We have to remember that breast cancer subtypes differ regarding prognosis, treatment,... and the conclusion would be very appreciated.


  • Is this paper outstanding in its discipline? (For example, would you like to see this work presented in a seminar at your hospital or university? Do you feel these results need to be incorporated in your next general lecture on the subject?) If yes, what makes it outstanding? If not, why not?

    Yes


  • Other Comments:

    The paper is very interesting and starts a novel pathway to face the complex labor of discovery of clinically usefull biomarkers

  • Competing interests:
    None
  • Invited by the author to review this article? :
    No
  • Have you previously published on this or a similar topic?:
    No
  • References:
    None
  • Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:

    Drug Discovery and Development / Cancer Research

  • How to cite:  Rodriguez-Serrano F .Biomarkers of Breast Cancer Cell Lines A; Pilot Study on Human Breast Cancer Metabolomics[Review of the article 'Biomarkers of Breast Cancer Cell Lines A; Pilot Study on Human Breast Cancer Metabolomics ' by Syed S].WebmedCentral 2013;4(4):WMCRW002669
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse
 

  • What are the main claims of the paper and how important are they?

    To identify various cell lines affecting human breast cancer


  • Are these claims novel? If not, please specify papers that weaken the claims to the originality of this one.

    Yes


  • Are the claims properly placed in the context of the previous literature?

    Yes


  • Do the results support the claims? If not, what other evidence is required?

    Yes


  • If a protocol is provided, for example for a randomized controlled trial, are there any important deviations from it? If so, have the authors explained adequately why the deviations occurred?

    Yes


  • Is the methodology valid? Does the paper offer enough details of its methodology that its experiments or its analyses could be reproduced?

    Yes


  • Would any other experiments or additional information improve the paper? How much better would the paper be if this extra work was done, and how difficult would such work be to do, or to provide?

    NA


  • Is this paper outstanding in its discipline? (For example, would you like to see this work presented in a seminar at your hospital or university? Do you feel these results need to be incorporated in your next general lecture on the subject?) If yes, what makes it outstanding? If not, why not?

    Yes.

     

    1. Quite thorough research has been done to identify the affecting cell lines with valid methodology.

    2. It will further require multi center trial for more data analysis

    3. This study will be very useful for determining the future treatment options for human breast cancer


  • Other Comments:

    An excellent research work has been done. I would like to congratulate the authors for their hard work!!

  • Competing interests:
    None
  • Invited by the author to review this article? :
    No
  • Have you previously published on this or a similar topic?:
    No
  • References:

    No

  • Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:

    As in-charge of cancer program of my institute we do conduct similar data analysis & research.

  • How to cite:  Belekar D M.Biomarkers of Breast Cancer Cell Lines: A Pilot Study on Human Breast Cancer Metabolomics[Review of the article 'Biomarkers of Breast Cancer Cell Lines A; Pilot Study on Human Breast Cancer Metabolomics ' by Syed S].WebmedCentral 2013;4(3):WMCRW002601
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse
 
Thanks a lot for reviewing
Responded by Dr. Sumaira N Syed on 15 Mar 2013 11:24:45 AM