Reviewer's report
Title:Apolipoprotein E COG 133 mimetic peptide improves
5-fluorouracil-induced intestinal mucositis
Version: 2Date:24 August 2011
Reviewer: Wei Han
Reviewer's report:
The manuscript is generally acceptable, but has many specific problems, some
of which I have noted as follows. So this manuscript needs some language and
format corrections before being published. And there are some recommended
experiments to the author which are useful to clarify the effect of apoE mimetic
peptide in 5-Fu induced intestinal mucositis.
- Major Compulsory Revisions
1)Slight compliance was found between In vivo with in vitro studies. Detecting
apoptosis and proliferation after 5-Fu challenged with or without apoE mimetic
peptide treatment in vivo, by TUNEL, Brdu or PCNA respectively or other widely
used methods. Then, the results become more persuasive.
2)Morphological Figures of IEC-6 after 5-Fu challenged with or without apoE
treatment are needed to show in the manuscript. Just a result from flow
cytometry is not convincing.
- Minor Essential Revisions
There are some minor mistakes in the manuscript, which the author should
correct. Such as:
1)Abstract,”…Improvements were also found with IEC-6 necrosis and migration
following apoE treatment” According to the experiment results, necrosis should
be replaced by apoptosis.
2)The information about the role of apoE plays in 5-Fu induced mucositis in the
background is insufficient.
3)Methods, ninth paragraph, 95#,60#are the correct writing; Twelfth paragraph,
“After 24 h”, h is missing.
4)Discussion, sixth paragraph, the quotation labeling is wrong, maybe
“…suggesting that IL-1 peptides are key players in the intestinal inflammatory
response following 5-Fu treatment[21]” should be changed to”…[22]”.
5)Please make sure the formats of the entire manuscript are consistency.
Whether or not beginning with two spaces in each paragraph; The tittles of
FIGURE 6 A and B will be better if both are bold or not; The figures should be
showed with uniform format; The abbreviation of apolipoprotein E COG 133
mimetic peptide should be consistent, and so on.
6)The descriptions of each figure should be more clearly.
7)Specify references expression
- Discretionary Revisions
1)Using immunohistochemistry method or specific assay kit to detect iNOS
expression in the intestine after 5-Fu challenged with or without apoE mimetic
peptide treatment (protein level detecting).
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Needs some language corrections before being
published
Statistical review: Yes, but I do not feel adequately qualified to assess the
statistics.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests
Reviewer's report
Title:Apolipoprotein E COG 133 mimetic peptide improves
5-fluorouracil-induced intestinal mucositis
Version: 2Date:24 August 2011
Reviewer: Wei Han
Reviewer's report:
The manuscript is generally acceptable, but has many specific problems, some
of which I have noted as follows. So this manuscript needs some language and
format corrections before being published. And there are some recommended
experiments to the author which are useful to clarify the effect of apoE mimetic
peptide in 5-Fu induced intestinal mucositis.
- Major Compulsory Revisions
1)Slight compliance was found between In vivo with in vitro studies. Detecting
apoptosis and proliferation after 5-Fu challenged with or without apoE mimetic
peptide treatment in vivo, by TUNEL, Brdu or PCNA respectively or other widely
used methods. Then, the results become more persuasive.
2)Morphological Figures of IEC-6 after 5-Fu challenged with or without apoE
treatment are needed to show in the manuscript. Just a result from flow
cytometry is not convincing.
- Minor Essential Revisions
There are some minor mistakes in the manuscript, which the author should
correct. Such as:
1)Abstract,”…Improvements were also found with IEC-6 necrosis and migration
following apoE treatment” According to the experiment results, necrosis should
be replaced by apoptosis.
2)The information about the role of apoE plays in 5-Fu induced mucositis in the
background is insufficient.
3)Methods, ninth paragraph, 95#,60#are the correct writing; Twelfth paragraph,
“After 24 h”, h is missing.
4)Discussion, sixth paragraph, the quotation labeling is wrong, maybe
“…suggesting that IL-1 peptides are key players in the intestinal inflammatory
response following 5-Fu treatment[21]” should be changed to”…[22]”.
5)Please make sure the formats of the entire manuscript are consistency.
Whether or not beginning with two spaces in each paragraph; The tittles of
FIGURE 6 A and B will be better if both are bold or not; The figures should be
showed with uniform format; The abbreviation of apolipoprotein E COG 133
mimetic peptide should be consistent, and so on.
6)The descriptions of each figure should be more clearly.
7)Specify references expression
- Discretionary Revisions
1)Using immunohistochemistry method or specific assay kit to detect iNOS
expression in the intestine after 5-Fu challenged with or without apoE mimetic
peptide treatment (protein level detecting).
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Needs some language corrections before being
published
Statistical review: Yes, but I do not feel adequately qualified to assess the
statistics.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests
Please review this paper.
user
Reviewer's report
Title:Apolipoprotein E COG 133 mimetic peptide improves
5-fluorouracil-induced intestinal mucositis
Version: 2Date:24 August 2011
Reviewer: Wei Han
Reviewer's report:
The manuscript is generally acceptable, but has many specific problems, some
of which I have noted as follows. So this manuscript needs some language and
format corrections before being published. And there are some recommended
experiments to the author which are useful to clarify the effect of apoE mimetic
peptide in 5-Fu induced intestinal mucositis.
- Major Compulsory Revisions
1)Slight compliance was found between In vivo with in vitro studies. Detecting
apoptosis and proliferation after 5-Fu challenged with or without apoE mimetic
peptide treatment in vivo, by TUNEL, Brdu or PCNA respectively or other widely
used methods. Then, the results become more persuasive.
2)Morphological Figures of IEC-6 after 5-Fu challenged with or without apoE
treatment are needed to show in the manuscript. Just a result from flow
cytometry is not convincing.
- Minor Essential Revisions
There are some minor mistakes in the manuscript, which the author should
correct. Such as:
1)Abstract,”…Improvements were also found with IEC-6 necrosis and migration
following apoE treatment” According to the experiment results, necrosis should
be replaced by apoptosis.
2)The information about the role of apoE plays in 5-Fu induced mucositis in the
background is insufficient.
3)Methods, ninth paragraph, 95#,60#are the correct writing; Twelfth paragraph,
“After 24 h”, h is missing.
4)Discussion, sixth paragraph, the quotation labeling is wrong, maybe
“…suggesting that IL-1 peptides are key players in the intestinal inflammatory
response following 5-Fu treatment[21]” should be changed to”…[22]”.
5)Please make sure the formats of the entire manuscript are consistency.
Whether or not beginning with two spaces in each paragraph; The tittles of
FIGURE 6 A and B will be better if both are bold or not; The figures should be
showed with uniform format; The abbreviation of apolipoprotein E COG 133
mimetic peptide should be consistent, and so on.
6)The descriptions of each figure should be more clearly.
7)Specify references expression
- Discretionary Revisions
1)Using immunohistochemistry method or specific assay kit to detect iNOS
expression in the intestine after 5-Fu challenged with or without apoE mimetic
peptide treatment (protein level detecting).
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Needs some language corrections before being
published
Statistical review: Yes, but I do not feel adequately qualified to assess the
statistics.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests
assistant