Next Article in Journal
Exopolysaccharide Carbohydrate Structure and Biofilm Formation by Rhizobium leguminosarum bv. trifolii Strains Inhabiting Nodules of Trifoliumrepens Growing on an Old Zn–Pb–Cd-Polluted Waste Heap Area
Next Article in Special Issue
Treatment of Neuromyelitis Optica Spectrum Disorders
Previous Article in Journal
Bioprospecting Fluorescent Plant Growth Regulators from Arabidopsis to Vegetable Crops
Previous Article in Special Issue
Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation in Neuromyelitis Optica-Spectrum Disorders (NMO-SD): State-of-the-Art and Future Perspectives
 
 
Review
Peer-Review Record

Neuromyelitis Optica Spectrum Disorder Treatment—Current and Future Prospects

Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2021, 22(6), 2801; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms22062801
by Marta Waliszewska-Prosół *, Justyna Chojdak-Łukasiewicz, Sławomir Budrewicz and Anna Pokryszko-Dragan
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2021, 22(6), 2801; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms22062801
Submission received: 19 February 2021 / Revised: 7 March 2021 / Accepted: 9 March 2021 / Published: 10 March 2021
(This article belongs to the Special Issue New Advances in the Pathogenesis, Diagnosis and Treatment of NMOSD)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The review of Waliszewska-Prosół et al. is concise and well written. 

In the introduction it was explained the clinical and immunological differences between MOG associated diseases and AQP4 positive NMOSD.

The article provides an updated overview of current and future treatment options for NMO patients. 

I recommend the paper be accepted for publication in its current form.

 

Author Response

Authors' response to the Reviewer comments

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you very much for your review. English language and style was check by native speaker.

Hopefully, the revised version of the manuscript, considering the above issues, would be found suitable for publication.

Authors

Reviewer 2 Report

Thank you for this nice and comprehensive review.

The last part on future directions is very informative.

The more recent trial of eculizumab should be added though. 

Author Response

Authors' response to the Reviewer comments

Dear Reviewer,

            Thank you very much for your comprehensive remark and suggestion. Changes have been made in the current version of the manuscript in yellow. We corrected the manuscript according to your proposal.

We've added more information about eculizumab (section 4.2.4 in manuscript) and added five new references (72-76).

English language and style was check by native speaker.

Hopefully, the revised version of the manuscript, considering the above issues, would be found suitable for publication.

Authors

Back to TopTop