Next Article in Journal
Nano-Formulation Endows Quorum Quenching Enzyme-Antibiotic Hybrids with Improved Antibacterial and Antibiofilm Activities against Pseudomonas aeruginosa
Next Article in Special Issue
Prediction of Response to Cisplatin-Based Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy of Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer Patients by Molecular Subtyping including KRT and FGFR Target Gene Assessment
Previous Article in Journal
Evaluation of the Impact of Pregnancy-Associated Factors on the Quality of Wharton’s Jelly-Derived Stem Cells Using SOX2 Gene Expression as a Marker
Previous Article in Special Issue
Computational Analysis Identifies Novel Biomarkers for High-Risk Bladder Cancer Patients
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Effects of Supplemental Drugs on Hexaminolevulinate (HAL)-Induced PpIX Fluorescence in Bladder Cancer Cell Suspensions

Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2022, 23(14), 7631; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms23147631
by Kit Man Chan 1, Krasimir Vasilev 2 and Melanie MacGregor 3,*
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2:
Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2022, 23(14), 7631; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms23147631
Submission received: 14 June 2022 / Revised: 6 July 2022 / Accepted: 6 July 2022 / Published: 10 July 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Molecular Research on Bladder Cancer)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This article, which studied the PpIX fluorescence in bladder cancer cells and normal cells when applied with seven different inhibitors combined with HAL, is valuable and of interest to the international scientific readers. The results are outstanding and clear, and it is recommended to minor revise before publication. The article has the following questions:

 

1.     The author should provide more evidence, cite relevant papers and more discussion to support the hypothesis in Line 207-209.

2.     The limitation of the study is suggested to mention to give the readers a balance view.

3.     The brief conclusion is recommended.

Author Response

Please see attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Question is clear, well defined. Expected results are important.

Experiments are smartly designed.

Methods are appropriate to answer the questions.

Results are clearly documented.

Conclusions are properly supported by experimental result.

It’s my pleasure to recommend this paper for publication.

Author Response

We thank reviewer 2 for their time and support.

We understand that no corrections were requested.

Back to TopTop