Identification of Prognostic Candidate Genes in Breast Cancer by Integrated Bioinformatic Analysis
, Chia Ying Li 2,3,†, Jia-Hua Cai 1, Phillip C.-Y. Sheu 4, Jeffrey J.P. Tsai 1, Meng-Yu Wu 5,6, Chia-Jung Li 7,8,* and Ming-Feng Hou 9,10,11,12,*Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The issue is interesting; bioinformatic analysis could be an important tool in cancer research. However, the results are presented in an obscure way and the paper is difficult to understand by a medical readership.
In particular:
Introduction section is prolix and often confuse; some phrases are unclear (for example, lined 60-63 and lines 71-72). The aim of the study is not adequately clarified.
Results section is also often unclear.
Discussion section contains general statements that are not relevant for the specific issue (for exapmle, lined 242-248). This section should underline and discuss the principal data emerging from the study. Authors should also hypothesize the possible applications of their results in disease management. Limitations of the study must be described at the end of this section.
Conclusions section is not pertinent. This section should briefly summarize the principal results and mention future directions.
Author Response
Please see the attached file.
Thanks
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Charles C.N. Wang et.al. were intented to identifiy key genes as potential new biomarkers, using three different databases. I did not have any major concerns on this article. I have a minor concern: it would be more informative if the authors could be more specific concerning the molecular pathways that the eight key genes: TXN, ANXA2, TPM4, LOXL2, 293 TPRN, ADCY6, TUBA1C and CMIP are involved. Do these genes participate to the same pathways? Any interactions?
Author Response
Please see the attached file.
Thanks
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Authors have clarified most obscure points. I recommend an accurate English revision only
Author Response
We would like to thank the reviewer for accepting our reply, and we also revised the English according to the reviewer's suggestion. We believe that our manuscript is now more suitable for considering its publications. If you have any other questions, please let us know.
