Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The topic is well presented. However there is the feeling that the article is a list, without exploring some of the information and implications that are cited.

Introduction could be improved to present better the characteristics of the disease.

Discussion is fine, but a bit generic. Maybe a more deep description or analysis of just one of the topic presented in the article could significantly improve it.   

 

There are some minor corrections to do:

96) Some typos in the legend of Table 1.

115) typos in orbicularis. Moreover the whole sentence is not clear.

132) Conclusions: …

151) Some typos in the legend of Table 2. There are typos in Table 2 also (insilco, jurket, ecc…). Finally, Table 2 should have some sort of alphabetic order to make more easy the reading when searching for a specific miRNA or cluster.

175) QMG should be briefly explained in the article.

 

Finally:

Reference [26] is missing in the text.

Reference [32] doesn't seems the correct one.

Is miR-145, not 146, the one described in reference [33].

Is miR-126, not 26, the one described in reference [52].

Author Response

1. We added some notes in the Introduction.
2. We improved discussion.
3. We corrected the typos.
4. We ordered miRNAs in Table 2.
5. We corrected the mentioned references.

Reviewer 2 Report

This review sheds some light on the possible implication of non-coding RNAs in the development of Myastenia Gravis.  

The theme of this research is interesting; however, I have some minor suggestions to make:

- I would include a more extensive future implication of this matter in clinical medicine. The review is otherwise incomplete.

-A proper conclusion section is missing.

Author Response

We added future perspectives and conclusions.