Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The article is consistent within itself. The references are relevant and recent. The cited sources are referenced correctly. Appropriate and key studies are included. The paper is comprehensive, the flow is logical and the data is presented critically.

However, there are some specific comments on weaknesses of the article and what could be improved:

Major points

1. Title should be rewritten, not it has no sense.
2. 6.2. The contribution of IL-17i to the modification of the intestinal microbiome - may be extended 
3. Some of the subsections should be revised and made more comprehensive

 

Author Response

1.Title should be rewritten, not it has no sense.-thank you for the observation, we have changed it

2. 6.2. The contribution of IL-17i to the modification of the intestinal microbiome - may be extended-thank you, we  extended it

3. Some of the subsections should be revised and made more comprehensive-thank you for suggestion, we hope to be revised subsections

Reviewer 2 Report

The review manuscript by Tiburca et. al. is an interesting review on the treatment of inflammatory intestinal disease with IL-17 inhibitors. The major concerns about the manuscript:

1. The abstract needs improvement.
2. The introduction is not well streamlined and fails to provide a good background regarding IL-17 and its associated disease and therapeutics.
3. The authors discuss other diseases apart from intestinal inflammatory disease, such as joint inflammation. I would recommend the authors to be specific and focus on the IL-17 and its associated disease only.
4. The manuscript is very confusing between inflammatory intestinal disease and inflammatory bowel disease.
5. How does IL-17 mediate inflammation and the crosstalk with other cell types is not very well discussed.
6. The abbreviations are not done properly.
7. There are a lot of grammatical mistakes and complex phrases. I would recommend the authors to have a person proofread the manuscript whose native language is English.

Author Response

1. The abstract needs improvement-Thank you for observations, we hope to be improved now
2. The introduction is not well streamlined and fails to provide a good background regarding IL-17 and its associated disease and therapeutics-Thank you, we change it
3. The authors discuss other diseases apart from intestinal inflammatory disease, such as joint inflammation. I would recommend the authors to be specific and focus on the IL-17 and its associated disease only-Thank you, we changed the subsections
4. The manuscript is very confusing between inflammatory intestinal disease and inflammatory bowel disease- Thank you, we corrected
5. How does IL-17 mediate inflammation and the crosstalk with other cell types is not very well discussed- We add some knowledge.
6. The abbreviations are not done properly.-Thank you, we correct them.

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The authors addressed all the issues raised by the referees. The paper has been improved.

Author Response

Thank you. The latest version of the manuscript is below.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

I thank the authors for the response

Author Response

Thank you. The latest version of the manuscript is below.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf