Next Article in Journal
Morphological Evidence of Telocytes in Skeletal Muscle Interstitium of Exercised and Sedentary Rodents
Previous Article in Journal
Unraveling the Complexity of HDL Remodeling: On the Hunt to Restore HDL Quality
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

A Novel Recombinant Fcγ Receptor-Targeted Survivin Combines with Chemotherapy for Efficient Cancer Treatment

Biomedicines 2021, 9(7), 806; https://doi.org/10.3390/biomedicines9070806
by Chiao-Chieh Wu 1, Chen-Yi Chiang 1, Shih-Jen Liu 1,2,3 and Hsin-Wei Chen 1,2,3,*
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 3: Anonymous
Biomedicines 2021, 9(7), 806; https://doi.org/10.3390/biomedicines9070806
Submission received: 31 May 2021 / Revised: 3 July 2021 / Accepted: 9 July 2021 / Published: 12 July 2021
(This article belongs to the Section Immunology and Immunotherapy)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The manuscript submitted aims to demonstrate that FLIPr can be used as an antigen delivery vector and that rSur-FLIPr fusion protein is a possible therapeutic cancer vaccine.

The authors provide a clear introduction to the subject, stating the potential of FLIPr as a vector for antigen delivery, the role of survivin as a tumor-associated antigen and the relevance of using rSur-FLIPr fusion protein as a cancer vaccine.

The title chosen is consistent and appropriate considering the content.

The abstract provides an accessible summary, and the keywords reflect the content.

Overall, the manuscript is well structured. Each section has a conclusion that guides the reader through the steps taken by the authors to prove their hypothesis. It is clear in the introduction that the authors have previously published results (reference 11) that were taken in consideration and further developed in this manuscript.

The methods used and models chosen by the authors are appropriate and thoroughly described.

The figures effectively illustrate the results presented in the manuscript.

In the results section 3.4, the paragraph between line 324-333 is repeated in line 334-343.

In the discussion section line 409-410 the authors could clarify the statement “rSur-FLIPr is superior to rSur”.

The references are correct and fitting to the statements presented in the manuscript.

Minor correction in writing:

Line 176. “Intraperitoneal (i.p.)” instead of “i.p” (used for the first time in the text); from then on i.p. can be used (ex. line 188)

Line 275. “in all three groups of mice” instead of “in the all three groups of mice”

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

It is interesting paper with potential clinical impact.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

It is a well written paper  regarding the combination of chemotherapy with rSur-FLIPr  for treatment to tumor bearing mice.

No comments.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Back to TopTop