Title: Unveiling the heterogeneity and immunotherapy potency of tumor-associated neutrophils
in the tumor microenvironment of Gastric cancer
Version: 1 Date: 20 Mar 2025
Reviewer's report:
Major Points
1. Figure Accessibility and Clarity:
- The manuscript references multiple figures (e.g., UMAP plots, heatmaps, pseudotime
trajectories) critical for interpreting results. However, these figures are not included in the
provided document. A thorough review of data visualization quality (resolution, labeling, legend
clarity) is necessary to ensure they effectively support the findings.
2. Outdated References:
- Key areas, such as immunotherapy and single-cell genomics, cite older studies (e.g., Reference
19: Ooi et al., 2009). Updating references to include recent advancements (e.g., 2022–2024
studies on neutrophil plasticity or gastric cancer subtyping) would strengthen the context and
relevance of the work.
3. Methods :
- While the methods are generally comprehensive, specific parameters are missing (e.g.,
thresholds for DEGs, resolution settings for clustering, or software configurations). Including
these details is crucial for reproducibility. For example:
- Exact criteria for GO/KEGG enrichment (e.g., adjusted p-value thresholds).
- Specific settings for `FindAllMarkers` (e.g., test used, minimum percentage of cells expressing
a gene).
4. Discussion Depth:
- The discussion could better emphasize how the identification of RGS2 in N4 TANs advances
the field. For instance:
- Contrast findings with prior studies on RGS2 in other cancers or neutrophil subsets.
- Elaborate on why targeting RGS2 might disrupt pro-tumor TAN functions compared to existing
targets (e.g., CD300ld).
Minor Points
1. Reference Formatting Inconsistencies
- Fix spacing issues (e.g., "1023- 1075" # "1023–1075").
- Standardize journal abbreviations (e.g., "Nucleic Acids Re.s2006" # "Nucleic Acids Res.
2006").
2. Grammar and Syntax
- Correct minor errors (e.g., "patients response to ICBs therapy are" # "patients’ responses to
ICB therapy are").
- Simplify overly long sentences (e.g., in the Abstract: "Tumor-associated neutrophils
predominantly interacted with epithelial cells via the LGALS9/CD45 and CD46/JAG1 signaling
pathways").
3. Technical Terminology
- Define niche terms (e.g., "pseudotime trajectory," "CNV score") briefly for broader
accessibility.
4. Conclusion Emphasis
- Highlight clinical implications (e.g., how RGS2 inhibition could synergize with existing
immunotherapies like PD-1/PD-L1 blockers).
Title: Unveiling the heterogeneity and immunotherapy potency of tumor-associated neutrophils
in the tumor microenvironment of Gastric cancer
Version: 1 Date: 20 Mar 2025
Reviewer's report:
Major Points
1. Figure Accessibility and Clarity:
- The manuscript references multiple figures (e.g., UMAP plots, heatmaps, pseudotime
trajectories) critical for interpreting results. However, these figures are not included in the
provided document. A thorough review of data visualization quality (resolution, labeling, legend
clarity) is necessary to ensure they effectively support the findings.
2. Outdated References:
- Key areas, such as immunotherapy and single-cell genomics, cite older studies (e.g., Reference
19: Ooi et al., 2009). Updating references to include recent advancements (e.g., 2022–2024
studies on neutrophil plasticity or gastric cancer subtyping) would strengthen the context and
relevance of the work.
3. Methods :
- While the methods are generally comprehensive, specific parameters are missing (e.g.,
thresholds for DEGs, resolution settings for clustering, or software configurations). Including
these details is crucial for reproducibility. For example:
- Exact criteria for GO/KEGG enrichment (e.g., adjusted p-value thresholds).
- Specific settings for `FindAllMarkers` (e.g., test used, minimum percentage of cells expressing
a gene).
4. Discussion Depth:
- The discussion could better emphasize how the identification of RGS2 in N4 TANs advances
the field. For instance:
- Contrast findings with prior studies on RGS2 in other cancers or neutrophil subsets.
- Elaborate on why targeting RGS2 might disrupt pro-tumor TAN functions compared to existing
targets (e.g., CD300ld).
Minor Points
1. Reference Formatting Inconsistencies
- Fix spacing issues (e.g., "1023- 1075" # "1023–1075").
- Standardize journal abbreviations (e.g., "Nucleic Acids Re.s2006" # "Nucleic Acids Res.
2006").
2. Grammar and Syntax
- Correct minor errors (e.g., "patients response to ICBs therapy are" # "patients’ responses to
ICB therapy are").
- Simplify overly long sentences (e.g., in the Abstract: "Tumor-associated neutrophils
predominantly interacted with epithelial cells via the LGALS9/CD45 and CD46/JAG1 signaling
pathways").
3. Technical Terminology
- Define niche terms (e.g., "pseudotime trajectory," "CNV score") briefly for broader
accessibility.
4. Conclusion Emphasis
- Highlight clinical implications (e.g., how RGS2 inhibition could synergize with existing
immunotherapies like PD-1/PD-L1 blockers).
Please review this paper.
user
Title: Unveiling the heterogeneity and immunotherapy potency of tumor-associated neutrophils
in the tumor microenvironment of Gastric cancer
Version: 1 Date: 20 Mar 2025
Reviewer's report:
Major Points
1. Figure Accessibility and Clarity:
- The manuscript references multiple figures (e.g., UMAP plots, heatmaps, pseudotime
trajectories) critical for interpreting results. However, these figures are not included in the
provided document. A thorough review of data visualization quality (resolution, labeling, legend
clarity) is necessary to ensure they effectively support the findings.
2. Outdated References:
- Key areas, such as immunotherapy and single-cell genomics, cite older studies (e.g., Reference
19: Ooi et al., 2009). Updating references to include recent advancements (e.g., 2022–2024
studies on neutrophil plasticity or gastric cancer subtyping) would strengthen the context and
relevance of the work.
3. Methods :
- While the methods are generally comprehensive, specific parameters are missing (e.g.,
thresholds for DEGs, resolution settings for clustering, or software configurations). Including
these details is crucial for reproducibility. For example:
- Exact criteria for GO/KEGG enrichment (e.g., adjusted p-value thresholds).
- Specific settings for `FindAllMarkers` (e.g., test used, minimum percentage of cells expressing
a gene).
4. Discussion Depth:
- The discussion could better emphasize how the identification of RGS2 in N4 TANs advances
the field. For instance:
- Contrast findings with prior studies on RGS2 in other cancers or neutrophil subsets.
- Elaborate on why targeting RGS2 might disrupt pro-tumor TAN functions compared to existing
targets (e.g., CD300ld).
Minor Points
1. Reference Formatting Inconsistencies
- Fix spacing issues (e.g., "1023- 1075" # "1023–1075").
- Standardize journal abbreviations (e.g., "Nucleic Acids Re.s2006" # "Nucleic Acids Res.
2006").
2. Grammar and Syntax
- Correct minor errors (e.g., "patients response to ICBs therapy are" # "patients’ responses to
ICB therapy are").
- Simplify overly long sentences (e.g., in the Abstract: "Tumor-associated neutrophils
predominantly interacted with epithelial cells via the LGALS9/CD45 and CD46/JAG1 signaling
pathways").
3. Technical Terminology
- Define niche terms (e.g., "pseudotime trajectory," "CNV score") briefly for broader
accessibility.
4. Conclusion Emphasis
- Highlight clinical implications (e.g., how RGS2 inhibition could synergize with existing
immunotherapies like PD-1/PD-L1 blockers).
assistant