Title: Zerumbone ameliorates the inflammatory response and organ damage in severe acute
pancreatitis via the ROS/NF-#B pathway
Version: 2 Date: 21 Feb 2023
Reviewer's report:
"PEER REVIEWER ASSESSMENTS:
OBJECTIVE - Full research articles: is there a clear objective that addresses a testable research
question(s) (brief or other article types: is there a clear objective)?
Yes - there is a clear objective
DESIGN - Is the current approach (including controls and analysis protocols) appropriate for
the objective?
Yes - the approach is appropriate
EXECUTION - Are the experiments and analyses performed with technical rigor to allow
confidence in the results?
Yes - experiments and analyses were performed appropriately
STATISTICS - Is the use of statistics in the manuscript appropriate?
Yes - appropriate statistical analyses have been used in the study
INTERPRETATION - Is the current interpretation/discussion of the results reasonable and not
overstated?
No - there are minor issues
OVERALL MANUSCRIPT POTENTIAL - Is the current version of this work technically
sound? If not, can revisions be made to make the work technically sound?
Maybe - with major revisions
PEER REVIEWER COMMENTS:
GENERAL COMMENTS: Authors of the article: ‘’ Zerumbone ameliorates the inflammatory
response and organ damage in severe acute pancreatitis via the ROS/NF-#B pathway’’ aimed
to determine the mechanism by which Zerumbone (ZER) ameliorates inflammation and organ
damage in a rat model of severe acute pancreatitis.
The study is well designed and hypothesis driven. The methodology used is robust. Graphical
display is of acceptable standard.
Scientific English is of acceptable standard.
However, I have some major concerns that need to be addressed before further processing.
REQUESTED REVISIONS:
Overall, the MS is well prepared. However, I have some concerns:
1. Several non standard abbreviations have been used that need to be defined once before use
in text; e.g., in abstract H&E staining.
2. Please provide full details on the procurement of  Zerumbone (ZER). Authors claimed it is
a natural plant ingredient--how was it obtained
3. From which plant/animal was it isolated? - include full details.
4. Abbreviations are used trivially; e.g., amylase (AMY)--what is the use of abbreviating one
word! Another example is CON groups- Please reconcile.
5. In the introduction, authors stipulate that; ''The application of traditional Chinese medicine in
severe pancreatitis has achieved promising results, and the effects of auxiliary clinical treatment
have been remarkable'' in the first paragraph.  This sentence looks disjointed. What is the
relationship of TCM and ZER?
6. Authors should properly define the topic and identify the research gap without confusing
readers.
7. Why was ''evodiamine'' quoted in the introduction. What is the relationship with ZER?
8. Please support section on ''Sample'' with a genuine reference.
9. Ethics approval and consent to participate- include approval number or code.
10. ''In conclusion, this study demonstrated that ZER alleviated SAP through the ROS/NF-#B
pathway. Thus, ZER may be beneficial in the treatment of SAP.'' Please include the relevance
of this study. How it will open new avenues for research ?
ADDITIONAL REQUESTS/SUGGESTIONS:
All corrections highlighted need to be addressed before further processing."
Title: Zerumbone ameliorates the inflammatory response and organ damage in severe acute
pancreatitis via the ROS/NF-#B pathway
Version: 2 Date: 21 Feb 2023
Reviewer's report:
"PEER REVIEWER ASSESSMENTS:
OBJECTIVE - Full research articles: is there a clear objective that addresses a testable research
question(s) (brief or other article types: is there a clear objective)?
Yes - there is a clear objective
DESIGN - Is the current approach (including controls and analysis protocols) appropriate for
the objective?
Yes - the approach is appropriate
EXECUTION - Are the experiments and analyses performed with technical rigor to allow
confidence in the results?
Yes - experiments and analyses were performed appropriately
STATISTICS - Is the use of statistics in the manuscript appropriate?
Yes - appropriate statistical analyses have been used in the study
INTERPRETATION - Is the current interpretation/discussion of the results reasonable and not
overstated?
No - there are minor issues
OVERALL MANUSCRIPT POTENTIAL - Is the current version of this work technically
sound? If not, can revisions be made to make the work technically sound?
Maybe - with major revisions
PEER REVIEWER COMMENTS:
GENERAL COMMENTS: Authors of the article: ‘’ Zerumbone ameliorates the inflammatory
response and organ damage in severe acute pancreatitis via the ROS/NF-#B pathway’’ aimed
to determine the mechanism by which Zerumbone (ZER) ameliorates inflammation and organ
damage in a rat model of severe acute pancreatitis.
The study is well designed and hypothesis driven. The methodology used is robust. Graphical
display is of acceptable standard.
Scientific English is of acceptable standard.
However, I have some major concerns that need to be addressed before further processing.
REQUESTED REVISIONS:
Overall, the MS is well prepared. However, I have some concerns:
1. Several non standard abbreviations have been used that need to be defined once before use
in text; e.g., in abstract H&E staining.
2. Please provide full details on the procurement of  Zerumbone (ZER). Authors claimed it is
a natural plant ingredient--how was it obtained
3. From which plant/animal was it isolated? - include full details.
4. Abbreviations are used trivially; e.g., amylase (AMY)--what is the use of abbreviating one
word! Another example is CON groups- Please reconcile.
5. In the introduction, authors stipulate that; ''The application of traditional Chinese medicine in
severe pancreatitis has achieved promising results, and the effects of auxiliary clinical treatment
have been remarkable'' in the first paragraph.  This sentence looks disjointed. What is the
relationship of TCM and ZER?
6. Authors should properly define the topic and identify the research gap without confusing
readers.
7. Why was ''evodiamine'' quoted in the introduction. What is the relationship with ZER?
8. Please support section on ''Sample'' with a genuine reference.
9. Ethics approval and consent to participate- include approval number or code.
10. ''In conclusion, this study demonstrated that ZER alleviated SAP through the ROS/NF-#B
pathway. Thus, ZER may be beneficial in the treatment of SAP.'' Please include the relevance
of this study. How it will open new avenues for research ?
ADDITIONAL REQUESTS/SUGGESTIONS:
All corrections highlighted need to be addressed before further processing."
Please review this paper.
user
Title: Zerumbone ameliorates the inflammatory response and organ damage in severe acute
pancreatitis via the ROS/NF-#B pathway
Version: 2 Date: 21 Feb 2023
Reviewer's report:
"PEER REVIEWER ASSESSMENTS:
OBJECTIVE - Full research articles: is there a clear objective that addresses a testable research
question(s) (brief or other article types: is there a clear objective)?
Yes - there is a clear objective
DESIGN - Is the current approach (including controls and analysis protocols) appropriate for
the objective?
Yes - the approach is appropriate
EXECUTION - Are the experiments and analyses performed with technical rigor to allow
confidence in the results?
Yes - experiments and analyses were performed appropriately
STATISTICS - Is the use of statistics in the manuscript appropriate?
Yes - appropriate statistical analyses have been used in the study
INTERPRETATION - Is the current interpretation/discussion of the results reasonable and not
overstated?
No - there are minor issues
OVERALL MANUSCRIPT POTENTIAL - Is the current version of this work technically
sound? If not, can revisions be made to make the work technically sound?
Maybe - with major revisions
PEER REVIEWER COMMENTS:
GENERAL COMMENTS: Authors of the article: ‘’ Zerumbone ameliorates the inflammatory
response and organ damage in severe acute pancreatitis via the ROS/NF-#B pathway’’ aimed
to determine the mechanism by which Zerumbone (ZER) ameliorates inflammation and organ
damage in a rat model of severe acute pancreatitis.
The study is well designed and hypothesis driven. The methodology used is robust. Graphical
display is of acceptable standard.
Scientific English is of acceptable standard.
However, I have some major concerns that need to be addressed before further processing.
REQUESTED REVISIONS:
Overall, the MS is well prepared. However, I have some concerns:
1. Several non standard abbreviations have been used that need to be defined once before use
in text; e.g., in abstract H&E staining.
2. Please provide full details on the procurement of  Zerumbone (ZER). Authors claimed it is
a natural plant ingredient--how was it obtained
3. From which plant/animal was it isolated? - include full details.
4. Abbreviations are used trivially; e.g., amylase (AMY)--what is the use of abbreviating one
word! Another example is CON groups- Please reconcile.
5. In the introduction, authors stipulate that; ''The application of traditional Chinese medicine in
severe pancreatitis has achieved promising results, and the effects of auxiliary clinical treatment
have been remarkable'' in the first paragraph.  This sentence looks disjointed. What is the
relationship of TCM and ZER?
6. Authors should properly define the topic and identify the research gap without confusing
readers.
7. Why was ''evodiamine'' quoted in the introduction. What is the relationship with ZER?
8. Please support section on ''Sample'' with a genuine reference.
9. Ethics approval and consent to participate- include approval number or code.
10. ''In conclusion, this study demonstrated that ZER alleviated SAP through the ROS/NF-#B
pathway. Thus, ZER may be beneficial in the treatment of SAP.'' Please include the relevance
of this study. How it will open new avenues for research ?
ADDITIONAL REQUESTS/SUGGESTIONS:
All corrections highlighted need to be addressed before further processing."
assistant