Exploring Gut–Brain Interaction Disorders: Mechanisms and Translational Therapies Crossing Neurology to Gastroenterology

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The title of this manuscript uses the verb exploring which I found an interesting choice and the manuscript fulfills this expectation.   I did not expect a comprehensive consideration of so many types of gut-brain-microbiome interactions.  The desire to be comprehensive however results in dealing with the material at a more superficial level.  This is to say that for many topics, there is a statement of a finding and little text to describe in detail the mechanism(s) involved.  This limitation is most evident in section 3 Mechanisms of gut brain interaction.  Within each section there are often a number of publication findings listed and perhaps a detail added, but very little detail for any finding.  It would be difficult in a “review” with such vast broad goals to go into detail for each and every finding in each and every category.  What the approach permits is a broad consideration which is followed by therapeutic interventions which is in greater detail, albeit still modest.  Each of the sections of section 3 would be sufficient by itself for a focused, interesting, and important view.  However, the review /literature search as written introduces the reader to important, interesting citations that if interested the reader may follow this lead.   This is important to point out to the reader.  That in an effort to be more comprehensive, that detailed focus on any one topic. Including mechanisms is not presented but references are provided for the reader to pursue particular areas.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

English acceptable, clear and correct

Author Response

The title of this manuscript uses the verb exploring which I found an interesting choice and the manuscript fulfills this expectation.   I did not expect a comprehensive consideration of so many types of gut-brain-microbiome interactions.  The desire to be comprehensive however results in dealing with the material at a more superficial level.  This is to say that for many topics, there is a statement of a finding and little text to describe in detail the mechanism(s) involved. 

 -Answer: Thank you for your thoughtful comments and suggestions. We appreciate your feedback and will endeavor to address each point in our revised manuscript.

This limitation is most evident in section 3 Mechanisms of gut brain interaction.  Within each section there are often a number of publication findings listed and perhaps a detail added, but very little detail for any finding.  It would be difficult in a “review” with such vast broad goals to go into detail for each and every finding in each and every category.  What the approach permits is a broad consideration which is followed by therapeutic interventions which is in greater detail, albeit still modest.  Each of the sections of section 3 would be sufficient by itself for a focused, interesting, and important view.  

• Response: We acknowledge your observation regarding the comprehensive nature of our manuscript resulting in a more superficial treatment of certain topics. In particular, we understand your concern regarding the limited detail provided for the mechanisms of gut-brain interaction in Section 3. While aiming for comprehensiveness, we recognize the necessity of delving deeper into specific mechanisms to enhance understanding. In our revision, we provided more detailed explanations where warranted while still maintaining a comprehensive overview.

However, the review /literature search as written introduces the reader to important, interesting citations that if interested the reader may follow this lead.   This is important to point out to the reader.  That in an effort to be more comprehensive, that detailed focus on any one topic. Including mechanisms is not presented but references are provided for the reader to pursue particular areas.

• Response- We appreciate your acknowledgment of the importance and interest of the citations included in our review. In response to your suggestion, we put a sentence in 2. Search strategy to explicitly inform the readers that our aim is to provide a broad overview of the topic while guiding them to specific references for more detailed information.

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

 

The review on gut-brain interactions and translational therapies provides a comprehensive overview of the current understanding and potential treatments for disorders involving the gut-brain axis. However, certain aspects should be considered before publication:

 

·      The review covers a range of mechanisms and therapies related to the gut-brain axis but may not delve deeply into each topic. A more focused review on specific aspects could provide a more detailed analysis.

·      While the authors tried to explain in this review on emerging therapies like gut microbiota modulation and dietary interventions, the substantial literature is not covered. Authors should explore studies with their effectiveness in more detail.

·      The review discusses translational therapies bridging neurology and gastroenterology, but the specific clinical implications and implementation of these therapies are not extensively explored.

·      Authors broadly discussed gut-brain interactions and therapies without focusing on specific disorders or conditions. A more targeted approach could provide more actionable insights for clinicians and researchers.

·      I would suggest authors to consider including additional figures explaining various mechanisms related to disease specific.

 

Overall, the review provides little overview of gut-brain interactions and potential therapies.

Author Response

The review on gut-brain interactions and translational therapies provides a comprehensive overview of the current understanding and potential treatments for disorders involving the gut-brain axis.

• We thank the reviewer for their thoughtful and comprehensive review of our manuscript on gut-brain interactions and translational therapies. We appreciate the time and effort you have dedicated to providing valuable feedback. Your acknowledgment of our work's comprehensive overview of current understanding and potential treatments for disorders involving the gut-brain axis is greatly appreciated. We will ensure that our manuscript clearly communicates these aspects to our readers.

However, certain aspects should be considered before publication:

• The review covers a range of mechanisms and therapies related to the gut-brain axis but may not delve deeply into each topic. A more focused review on specific aspects could provide a more detailed analysis.   While the authors tried to explain in this review on emerging therapies like gut microbiota modulation and dietary interventions, the substantial literature is not covered. Authors should explore studies with their effectiveness in more detail.

-Response: Your point regarding the need for a more detailed exploration of emerging therapies, such as gut microbiota modulation and dietary interventions, is well taken. We agree that a more thorough analysis of the literature on their effectiveness would enrich the review. In the revised manuscript, we dedicated more attention to discussing the efficacy and potential implications of these therapies.

• The review discusses translational therapies bridging neurology and gastroenterology, but the specific clinical implications and implementation of these therapies are not extensively explored.

-Response: We appreciate your observation regarding the need for a deeper exploration of the clinical implications and implementation of translational therapies discussed in our review. In our revision, we have expanded upon this aspect, providing more insights into the practical aspects of implementing drug therapies, microbiota modulation and especially we have focused on dietary interventions, on which a vast new paragraph has been introduced.

• Authors broadly discussed gut-brain interactions and therapies without focusing on specific disorders or conditions. A more targeted approach could provide more actionable insights for clinicians and researchers.

-Response: Your suggestion to adopt a more targeted approach focusing on specific disorders or conditions is noted. In our revised manuscript, we included more focused discussions on the gut-brain interactions and therapies relevant to specific disorders, thereby offering readers practical guidance applicable to their respective fields of interest – particularly focusing on irritable bowels syndrome as a representative of the most common gut-brain interaction disorders as well as the influence of dietary factors and gut health on neurodegenerative disease.

• I would suggest authors to consider including additional figures explaining various mechanisms related to disease specific.

-Response: We appreciate your recommendation to include additional figures elucidating various mechanisms related to specific diseases. In response to your suggestion, we crafted and incorporated a supplementary figure, to provide visual representations of key mechanisms, thereby enriching the reader's understanding of the topics discussed.

Overall, the review provides little overview of gut-brain interactions and potential therapies.
-Response- Once again, we sincerely thank you for your valuable feedback, which will undoubtedly contribute to the improvement of our manuscript. We look forward to incorporating these suggestions and enhancing the quality and depth of our review.

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I appreciate authors efforts in revising the manuscript.

I have no further comments on this manuscript.

 

Author Response

I appreciate authors efforts in revising the manuscript. I have no further comments on this manuscript.

 

- Thank you for your time and valuable review.