Next Article in Journal
Sinorhizobium meliloti DnaJ Is Required for Surface Motility, Stress Tolerance, and for Efficient Nodulation and Symbiotic Nitrogen Fixation
Next Article in Special Issue
IRAK2, an Immune and Radiation-Response Gene, Correlates with Advanced Disease Features but Predicts Higher Post-Irradiation Local Control in Non-Metastatic and Resected Oral Cancer Patients
Previous Article in Journal
Palmitic Acid Inhibits Myogenic Activity and Expression of Myosin Heavy Chain MHC IIb in Muscle Cells through Phosphorylation-Dependent MyoD Inactivation
Previous Article in Special Issue
Advances in Boron Neutron Capture Therapy (BNCT) for Recurrent Intracranial Meningioma
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
IJMS
Volume 24
Issue 6
10.3390/ijms24065849
Review Report
ijms-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
Article
Peer-Review Record

Local Liver Irradiation Concurrently Versus Sequentially with Cabozantinib on the Pharmacokinetics and Biodistribution in Rats

Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2023, 24(6), 5849; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms24065849
by Yu-Chuen Huang 1,2,†, Pei-Ying Hsieh 3,†, Li-Ying Wang 4,5, Tung-Hu Tsai 6, Yu-Jen Chen 1,6,7,8 and Chen-Hsi Hsieh 6,9,10,*
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2023, 24(6), 5849; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms24065849
Submission received: 7 February 2023 / Revised: 7 March 2023 / Accepted: 16 March 2023 / Published: 19 March 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Recent Advances in Radiotherapy)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The manuscript involves the study of pharmacokinetics and biodistribution of cabozantinib in rats following Local liver irradiation concurrently versus sequentially. My main concern is the method of assay and its validation that may dramatically affect the results of the study.

1.       Lines 107-115: In the methodology, the authors mentioned two different ranges for calibration curves. Please explain.

2.       Lines 124-126: (The relative error and coefficient of variation were maintained within ± 15%, except for the LLOQ, which was not permitted to exceed ± 20%)…Does this match the presented results? Please clarify.

3.       Lines 202-205: the following concerns about the method validity should be addressed in details:

·         The author reported only LOD is 0.5 µg/mL, while according to the calibration curve LOQ is 0.05 µg/mL? The authors should clarify this confusion.

·         The % bias and RSD are relatively high.  The authors should revise the acceptable limits for % bias and % RSD according to the USP. These limits should be stated with appropriated cited reference and the reported ranges should conform with such limits.

Author Response

Please see the attachment!

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The manuscript “Local liver irradiation concurrently versus sequentially with cabozantinib on the pharmacokinetics and biodistribution in rats” found the change in biodistribution of cabozantinib that could be considered in the clinical practice. This work could be accepted after some minor revisions.

1. The introduction needs a major revision to highlight the rationale of study.

2. Since the biodistribution of cabozantinib was changed, the histological investigation should be added to observe the corresponding change.

Author Response

Please see the attachment!

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The authors addressed the comments in an acceptable way. the paper can be accepted for publication.

Back to TopTop