Next Article in Journal
Genome-Wide Identification of the Cyclic Nucleotide-Gated Ion Channel Gene Family and Expression Profiles Under Low-Temperature Stress in Luffa cylindrica L.
Next Article in Special Issue
Combining antimiR-25 and cGAMP Nanocomplexes Enhances Immune Responses via M2 Macrophage Reprogramming
Previous Article in Journal
Sexual Dimorphism in Impairment of Acetylcholine-Mediated Vasorelaxation in Zucker Diabetic Fatty (ZDF) Rat Aorta: A Monogenic Model of Obesity-Induced Type 2 Diabetes
Previous Article in Special Issue
Antibodies Targeting Human or Mouse VSIG4 Repolarize Tumor-Associated Macrophages Providing the Potential of Potent and Specific Clinical Anti-Tumor Response Induced across Multiple Cancer Types
 
 
Review
Peer-Review Record

Regenerative Inflammation: The Mechanism Explained from the Perspective of Buffy-Coat Protagonism and Macrophage Polarization

Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2024, 25(20), 11329; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms252011329
by Rubens Andrade Martins 1, Fábio Ramos Costa 2, Luyddy Pires 3,4, Márcia Santos 5, Gabriel Silva Santos 3,4,*, João Vitor Lana 6, Bruno Ramos Costa 7, Napoliane Santos 3,4, Alex Pontes de Macedo 3,4, André Kruel 4 and José Fábio Lana 3,4,6,8,9
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2:
Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2024, 25(20), 11329; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms252011329
Submission received: 24 September 2024 / Revised: 14 October 2024 / Accepted: 15 October 2024 / Published: 21 October 2024
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Macrophage Polarization: Learning to Manage It (4th Edition))

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

In this manuscript, Martins RA and collaborators analysed the critical role of the buffy-coat in influencing macrophage polarization and its therapeutic potential. 

Specific comments:

1)       Figures legend should be added.

2)       Section 2: a new table summarizing the cellular composition of the Buffy-Coat and its mononuclear cells should be included.

3)       Line 127-129 sentence is repeated at lines 176-178.

4)       Acronyms need to be checked.

5)       Section 4: applications of L-PRP and P-PRP and their importance on clinical uses should be discussed.

6)       Line 315-317: references are missing.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

 Minor editing of English language revision is required.

Author Response

Please see attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

In this review manuscript, Martins et al. give a detailed overview not only over the buffy coat itself, but also over its various cellular and non-cellular components. They mainly focus on the therapeutic opportunities, which lie in these components but also give detailed explanation about the single cell fractions and their responses in this context. In general, this review is exhaustive and highly informative, even for readers, which are not familiar with this research field. The figures are simple, but self-explanatory and support the text.

Overall the writing, phrasing and grammar of the manuscript are excellent and understandable. Very well done. All of the topics are very detailed and sufficiently explained. I have only two minor suggestions, however they should not hinder the publication of this remarkable review manuscript.

 

Minor points:

Figure 1 is very nice and understandable. It could be slightly improved by adding the approximate percentual amounts of the single contents. This would be especially interesting for the immune cells in the buffy coat.

In lines 151-152: A little error sneaked in in these lines, which state “M1 macrophages are activated by toll-like receptors stimulated by factors such as interferon-γ, LPS (lipopolysaccharide), and TNF-α [13]. This is not correct. Toll-like receptors are activated by LPS and other PAMPs, but not by interferons or TNF, which have their very won receptors. The authors wrote it correctly a few lines later (164-165).

Author Response

Please see attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Back to TopTop