Next Article in Journal
Design, Synthesis and Pharmacological Evaluation of Novel C2,C3-Quinoxaline Derivatives as Promising Anxiolytic Agents
Next Article in Special Issue
Non-Invasive Tear Break-Up Detection with the Kowa DR-1α and Its Relationship to Dry Eye Clinical Severity
Previous Article in Journal
NEAT1 Confers Radioresistance to Hepatocellular Carcinoma Cells by Inducing PINK1/Parkin-Mediated Mitophagy
Previous Article in Special Issue
A, B, C’s of Trk Receptors and Their Ligands in Ocular Repair
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Conjunctival Fluid Secretion Impairment via CaCC-CFTR Dysfunction Is the Key Mechanism in Environmental Dry Eye

Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2022, 23(22), 14399; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms232214399
by Jinyu Zhang 1,†, Limian Lin 1,†, Xiaomin Chen 1, Shuyi Wang 1, Yuan Wei 1, Wenliang Zhou 2, Shuangjian Yang 3 and Shiyou Zhou 1,*
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2022, 23(22), 14399; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms232214399
Submission received: 22 September 2022 / Revised: 12 November 2022 / Accepted: 15 November 2022 / Published: 19 November 2022

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The manuscript by Zhang et al. investigates the role of P2Y2R dysfunction on eDED. Overall the study is difficult to understand due to many grammar errors and the manuscript would benefit from editing. There is also a lack of detail and rigor in the Results section. For instance, a description of the fluorescence staining method in the Results would make the data easier to understand. Also the efficiency of the siRNA knockdown is not reported, and the control that was used is a saline solution instead of a siRNA with a random sequence, making the experiment difficult to interpret. Further the authors report values with overlapping error bars for Figure 2b and I am unsure whether the reported difference is significant.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

First of all, I would like to congratulate the authors for the work. The point of view is original and its reading has been interesting.

Despite this, perhaps because of my speciality, I found the structure of the work curious. The fact that the "Materials and Methods" section comes after the "results" and "discussion" sections has been somewhat confusing to me.

However, the research sheds light on a not fully understood dysfunction that causes serious visual problems for many people. The findings found could represent a new way of addressing this dysfunction.

I would encourage them to continue advancing in their research in order to offer clinicians more tools to deal with this pathology.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Back to TopTop