Reviewer's report
Title:Truncated LEF-1 is one of the key regulators in the growth of colon
carcinoma
Version: 3Date:14 November 2011
Reviewer: Andrew Quest
Reviewer's report:
Revision of resubmitted manuscript
The authors addressed many of my previous comments in a satisfactory fashion
with the exception of those concerning Figures 2 and 6 (see below)
My previous comment to Figure 2 was: Cells are compared after analysis of the
cell cycle by flow cytometry. Rather surprisingly, no increments in the sub G0/G1
population are detected for both the SW480-dL and HT29-dL cells. This would be
expected based on the result shown in Figure 3 where an increase in Annexin-V
positive cells is observed for both these cell lines. The authors need to provide
an explanation for this discrepancy and preferably should include the percentage
cells in sub G0/G1 in the analysis shown in Figure 2.
The authors responded that they had quantified the flow cytometry data and
observed significant increases in G0/G1. However, my question related to the
SUB G0/G1 population that would be expected since it is indicative of apoptosis.
Accumulation in G0/G1 alone is more indicative of cell cycle arrest.
With respect to Figure 6, I commented that the authors should evaluate whether
reduced tumor vascularization observed for cells expressing the LEF-1-dL variant
is also significantly reduced in tumors of the same size.
The authors responded that in fact the tumors were of the same size and were
analyzed 15 days after subcutaneous injection of cells. However, in Figure 6A
the authors show and claim that tumors were of different sizes after 15 days.
Incidentally, this statement also contrasts with data shown in panel 6C where
tumors of appreciable volumen were not really detectable until after 20 days.
The authors have changed the title. However, no evidence is provided indicating
that LEF-1 variants are “key” regulators. Changes in many molecules will induce
similar changes.
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a
statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
'I declare that I have no competing interests'
Reviewer's report
Title:Truncated LEF-1 is one of the key regulators in the growth of colon
carcinoma
Version: 3Date:14 November 2011
Reviewer: Andrew Quest
Reviewer's report:
Revision of resubmitted manuscript
The authors addressed many of my previous comments in a satisfactory fashion
with the exception of those concerning Figures 2 and 6 (see below)
My previous comment to Figure 2 was: Cells are compared after analysis of the
cell cycle by flow cytometry. Rather surprisingly, no increments in the sub G0/G1
population are detected for both the SW480-dL and HT29-dL cells. This would be
expected based on the result shown in Figure 3 where an increase in Annexin-V
positive cells is observed for both these cell lines. The authors need to provide
an explanation for this discrepancy and preferably should include the percentage
cells in sub G0/G1 in the analysis shown in Figure 2.
The authors responded that they had quantified the flow cytometry data and
observed significant increases in G0/G1. However, my question related to the
SUB G0/G1 population that would be expected since it is indicative of apoptosis.
Accumulation in G0/G1 alone is more indicative of cell cycle arrest.
With respect to Figure 6, I commented that the authors should evaluate whether
reduced tumor vascularization observed for cells expressing the LEF-1-dL variant
is also significantly reduced in tumors of the same size.
The authors responded that in fact the tumors were of the same size and were
analyzed 15 days after subcutaneous injection of cells. However, in Figure 6A
the authors show and claim that tumors were of different sizes after 15 days.
Incidentally, this statement also contrasts with data shown in panel 6C where
tumors of appreciable volumen were not really detectable until after 20 days.
The authors have changed the title. However, no evidence is provided indicating
that LEF-1 variants are “key” regulators. Changes in many molecules will induce
similar changes.
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a
statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
'I declare that I have no competing interests'
Please review this paper.
user
Reviewer's report
Title:Truncated LEF-1 is one of the key regulators in the growth of colon
carcinoma
Version: 3Date:14 November 2011
Reviewer: Andrew Quest
Reviewer's report:
Revision of resubmitted manuscript
The authors addressed many of my previous comments in a satisfactory fashion
with the exception of those concerning Figures 2 and 6 (see below)
My previous comment to Figure 2 was: Cells are compared after analysis of the
cell cycle by flow cytometry. Rather surprisingly, no increments in the sub G0/G1
population are detected for both the SW480-dL and HT29-dL cells. This would be
expected based on the result shown in Figure 3 where an increase in Annexin-V
positive cells is observed for both these cell lines. The authors need to provide
an explanation for this discrepancy and preferably should include the percentage
cells in sub G0/G1 in the analysis shown in Figure 2.
The authors responded that they had quantified the flow cytometry data and
observed significant increases in G0/G1. However, my question related to the
SUB G0/G1 population that would be expected since it is indicative of apoptosis.
Accumulation in G0/G1 alone is more indicative of cell cycle arrest.
With respect to Figure 6, I commented that the authors should evaluate whether
reduced tumor vascularization observed for cells expressing the LEF-1-dL variant
is also significantly reduced in tumors of the same size.
The authors responded that in fact the tumors were of the same size and were
analyzed 15 days after subcutaneous injection of cells. However, in Figure 6A
the authors show and claim that tumors were of different sizes after 15 days.
Incidentally, this statement also contrasts with data shown in panel 6C where
tumors of appreciable volumen were not really detectable until after 20 days.
The authors have changed the title. However, no evidence is provided indicating
that LEF-1 variants are “key” regulators. Changes in many molecules will induce
similar changes.
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a
statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
'I declare that I have no competing interests'
assistant