Next Article in Journal
Predictive Analysis of Maxillary Canine Impaction through Sella Turcica Bridging, Ponticulus Posticus Calcification, and Lateral Incisor Anomalies: A Retrospective Observational Study
Next Article in Special Issue
Determination of UV Filters in Waste Sludge Using QuEChERS Method Followed by In-Port Derivatization Coupled with GC–MS/MS
Previous Article in Journal
Optimized Lambda Exonuclease Digestion or Purification Using Streptavidin-Coated Beads: Which One Is Best for Successful DNA Aptamer Selection?
Previous Article in Special Issue
Solid-Phase Microextraction—Gas Chromatography Analytical Strategies for Pesticide Analysis
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

An Efficient, Simultaneous Electrochemical Assay of Rosuvastatin and Ezetimibe from Human Urine and Serum Samples

Methods Protoc. 2022, 5(6), 90; https://doi.org/10.3390/mps5060090
by Leyla Karadurmus 1, Sevinc Kurbanoglu 2, Bengi Uslu 2 and Sibel A. Ozkan 2,*
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2:
Methods Protoc. 2022, 5(6), 90; https://doi.org/10.3390/mps5060090
Submission received: 29 September 2022 / Revised: 25 October 2022 / Accepted: 27 October 2022 / Published: 1 November 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Women’s Special Issue Series: Analytical Methods)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The paper can be published after minor revision reflecting comments inserted as yellow notes into attached manuscript

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

We would like to thank the Reviewer for her/his comments and suggestions. Changes requested by the reviewer appear in yellow in the manuscript.

Reviewer 2 Report

The manuscript by Karadurmus et al., entitled “An Efficient Simultaneous Electrochemical Assay of Rosuvastatin and Ezetimibe from Human Urine and Serum Samples” is interesting and can be accepted for publication after major revision

[1]   This study report simultaneous determination of two drugs but I could not see the AdsDPV response of two drugs simultaneously. Authors must show this response since they claim its simultaneous determination.

[2]   The present work does not report the modification of GCE with suitable modifier such as nanomaterials. Authors must state suitable reason in the introduction.

[3]   Authors used 0.1 M H2SO4 as an electrolyte. What is the response of these drugs in some buffers like PBS, BR, etc. Since this study reports the analysis of biological samples, H2SO4 medium is not recommended.

[4]   What is the selectivity of this sensor in the presence of potential interferences such as glucose, ascorbic acid, uric acid, and mixture of interferences.

[5]   The scan rate study figure is still missing in the main text to confirm the adsorption control behaviour of the drugs at the electrode surface.

[6]   The sensitivity value is missing which must be reported.

[7]   The electrochemical reactions of these drugs at the surface of electrode are missing. Author must discus suitable reaction mechanism with chemical reactions.

 

Author Response

Reviewer 2

 

We would like to thank the Reviewer for her/his comments and suggestions. Changes requested by the reviewer appear in yellow in the manuscript.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Authors have addressed all the concerns raised, therefore, manuscript can be accepted for publication

Back to TopTop