Sulforaphane from Brassica Oleracea Induces Apoptosis in Oral Squamous Carcinoma Cells via p53 Activation and Mitochondrial Membrane Potential Dysfunction
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsI carefully read the manuscript entitled “Auranofin as a novel anticancer drug for anaplastic thyroid cancer".
To improve it, some comments must be made.
The comments are as follows:
- It is suggested that the keywords be organized based on the PubMed MeSH terms and rearranged according to the English alphabet.
- Oral cancer is a collection of different parts of the mouth; it is suggested that it be mentioned in the “introduction” section.
- It is suggested to add a section titled “chemicals” in methods.
- Figure 5 part (b) needs a significant symbol.
- Please attention to the significant symbol in the Figure 6 legend (**p < 0.05).
- It is strongly suggested to imply the full name of the abbreviation for first in the manuscript.
- The manuscript needs some moderate English editing.
Comments on the Quality of English Language- The manuscript needs some moderate English editing.
Author Response
Comment 1: It is suggested that the keywords be organized based on the PubMed MeSH terms and rearranged according to the English alphabet.
Response 1: Thank you for the comment. The keywords have been organized based on the PubMed MeSH terms and rearranged according to the English alphabet.
Comment 2: Oral cancer is a collection of different parts of the mouth; it is suggested that it be mentioned in the “introduction” section.
Response 2: Thank you for the comment. As suggested, ‘Oral cancer is a malignancy that can arise in different areas of the oral cavity’ has been added to the introduction. [Introduction, Page 1, 1st paragraph, 2nd - 3rd line].
Comment 3: It is suggested to add a section titled “chemicals” in methods.
Response 3: Thank you for the comment. The details of all chemicals have been elaborately listed under each method.
Comment 4: Figure 5 part (b) needs a significant symbol.
Response 4: Thank you for pointing that out. The authors have recreated Figure 5(b) with the significance level. The updated figure has been uploaded to the MDPI submission portal. Additionally, the legend for Figure 5 (b) has been updated in the results section.
Comment 5: Please attention to the significant symbol in the Figure 6 legend (**p < 0.05).
Response 5: Thank you for pointing that out. The significance level has been corrected (*p<0.05) in the legend for Figure 6(i).
Comment 6: It is strongly suggested to imply the full name of the abbreviation for first in the manuscript.
Response 6: Thank you for the comment. The authors have made the following additions.
1) Materials and Method section: (2.2) Full form of MTT added, (2.4) Full form of the TUNEL assay added, (2.5) Full form of PBS and annexin V-FITC added, (2.6) Full form of the JC-1 dye added, (2.9) Full form of RIPA added.
2) Results section: (3.3) Full form of 7-AAD added
3) Discussion section: 2nd paragraph, 1st line, full form of Hep-2 cell line added, 3rd paragraph, 1st line, full form of HepG2 cell added.
Comment 7: The manuscript needs some moderate English editing.
Response 7: Thank you for the valuable comment. We submitted the manuscript for English Language Editing Services (MDPI). The revised manuscript along with the certificate is uploaded on the submission portal of MDPI
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThis article by Adtani et al. introduces the efficacy of sulforaphane in inducing apoptosis in carcinoma cells. In general, this is a very interesting topic, but it should undergo some revision. I would recommend the following corrections:
1. Improve the Introduction. Explain the importance of sulforaphane or how p53 activation and mitochondrial pathway targeting may provide a novel therapeutic advantage over standard OSCC treatments.
2. What are the advantages of sulforaphane compared to other OSCC therapies?
3. Discuss sulforaphane’s bioavailability, optimal dosing for in vivo experiments, and potential side effects if any.
4. Rewrite the conclusion to make it stronger with future goals, such as in vivo testing or pre-clinical trials.
5. Revise the text for grammatical errors.
Author Response
Comments 1: Improve the Introduction. Explain the importance of sulforaphane or how p53 activation and mitochondrial pathway targeting may provide a novel therapeutic advantage over standard OSCC treatments.
Response 1: Thank you for pointing this out. We agree with this comment. Therefore, we have improvised the introduction. As suggested, the importance of sulforaphane has been added together with the response to comment 2 ‘. [Introduction, page 2, 5th paragraph, 1st – 6th line].
Comment 2: What are the advantages of sulforaphane compared to other OSCC therapies?
Response 2: Agree. We have, accordingly added information stating the advantages of sulforaphane compared to OSCC therapies [Introduction, page 2, 5th paragraph, 1st – 6th line].
Comment 3: Discuss sulforaphane’s bioavailability, optimal dosing for in vivo experiments, and potential side effects if any.
Response 3: Thank you for pointing this out. We agree with this comment. As suggested the bioavailability and potential side effects of sulforaphane have been added to the introduction. [Introduction, page 2, 3rd paragraph, 5th – 11th line]. The optimal dose of sulforaphane for in-vivo experiments for OSCC could not be pointed out.
Comments 4: Rewrite the conclusion to make it stronger with future goals, such as in vivo testing or pre-clinical trials.
Response 4: Thank you once again. The conclusion has been updated as suggested. [Conclusion, page 12, 14th – 18th line]
Comment 5: Revise the text for grammatical errors
Response 5: Thank you for the valuable comment. We submitted the manuscript for English Language Editing Services (MDPI). The revised manuscript, along with the certificate, is uploaded on the submission portal of MDPI.
