The Interleukin-15 and Interleukin-8 Axis as a Novel Mechanism for Recurrent Chronic Rhinosinusitis with Nasal Polyps
, Yen-Ling Chiu 3, Ruo-Wei Hong 3, Ping-Chia Cheng 2, Po-Wen Cheng 2 and Li-Jen Liao 2,4,*
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThis manuscript is well written according to author's intensive research data on mucosal linings of chronic rhinitis patient. I reccommend this paper can be accepted for publication in MDPI journal, but authors should need much more discussion as regard IL-15. This pleiotropic cytokine reveals various types of function to mucosal site of inflammation, such as allergic rhinitis, bronchial asthma and so on. For example, is IL-15 produced from what kinds of cells, Just NK cells or epithelial cells, and why IL-15 production is upregulated in mucosal linings of rCRSwNP. Furthermore, what is the result of IL-15 in mucosal linings of CRSsNP, not persistent ? Otherwise, IL-8/IL-15 axis, which authors proposed firstly, is not accepted from their results. Authors should revise this paper as much as they can from this point of view. However, nonetheless, I highly evaluate this work as nice piece of paper.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe authors have conducted a two phase study in patients with nasal polyposis and included different subgroups and identified IL-8 as an important pathway.
It is a well conducted study and a few clarifications will help to make it stronger
figure 2 is not clear
In the second phase, how many of these patients had recurrent nasal polyposis or were all cases had nasal polyps for the first time
In the entire group, how many had been treated with intranasal steroids, montelukast and biologics specially dupilumab
Add a few sentences on the strength of the study
Write conclusions for phase I and phase II of the study separately. They are not exactly the same population and the conclusion therefore will be different
Comments on the Quality of English Languageminor editing needed
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsI think no more revision is needed to be accepted, even though I am not fully satisfied with author's revised manuscript.
