Review Reports
- Verónica Alcolea1,2,
- Deepkamal N. Karelia3,4 and
- Manoj K. Pandey3,4
- et al.
Reviewer 1: Anonymous Reviewer 2: Anonymous Reviewer 3: Surendra Rajpurohit
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The addition of two extra melanoma cell lines to confirm the activity of compound 1 is an important improvement. However the results overstate some of the data obtained. In particular, in the apoptotic assays the gating in the 7-AAD experiments for SKMel28 (Fig 7B) seem incorrect i,e 15% early apoptosis seems arbitrarily gated and very high level of background apoptosis. The gate should be shifted to the right, and the limited apoptosis should be highlighted. Minor comment: What was the source of the melanoma cell lines, as ATCC reference has been removed?Author Response
Response to Reviewer #1
The addition of two extra melanoma cell lines to confirm the activity of compound 1 is an important improvement. However the results overstate some of the data obtained. In particular, in the apoptotic assays the gating in the 7-AAD experiments for SKMel28 (Fig 7B) seem incorrect i,e 15% early apoptosis seems arbitrarily gated and very high level of background apoptosis. The gate should be shifted to the right, and the limited apoptosis should be highlighted. Minor comment: What was the source of the melanoma cell lines, as ATCC reference has been removed?
Response: The gating has been corrected as per Reviewer´s suggestion and the new version of Figure 7 is now incorporated in the revised version of the manuscript. The cells were provided by Dr. Gavin Robertson. A sentence reflecting this fact is included in the acknowledgment section (highlighted in yellow).
Reviewer 2 Report
None. The authors have adequately addressed the concerns I had in my original review.
Author Response
Response to Reviewer # 2
None. The authors have adequately addressed the concerns I had in my original review.
Response: The authors appreciate the Reviewer´s comments.
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments has been attached with this in section
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Response to Reviewer # 3
The revised manuscript submitted by the author groups covers my quarries in a satisfactory manner by incorporating the required answers and hopefully will meets the criteria to accept this revised version of this manuscript for publication in IJMS.
Response: The authors appreciate the Reviewer´s comments.