Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The review is well written and very exhaustive. The authors probably could shorten the clinical trials by including the most promising ones.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

This is a narrative review focused on genetic changes important for tumour-specific replication, transgene expression, interaction with the immune system and summarizes the ongoing clinical trials.

It has strong points, but authors should made the following amendments:

Although it is a narrative review, the abstract section should obtain a more structured format.

The introduction section should contain the current gap in the literature leading to the rationale of the current paper.

There must be a search strategy and a schedule from the start till the end of the paper, together with a separate section with the limitations of the study.

Authors should also indicate the originality of their figures.

The conclusion should adhere to their exact findings.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

The 3 first comments should be revisited.

As for the modification of Cunliffe et al, 2020, authors should state that they have had the relevant permission.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf