Review on Long Non-Coding RNAs as Biomarkers and Potentially Therapeutic Targets for Bacterial Infections

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report (New Reviewer)

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This is an excellent and timely review of the potential for lncRNAs as biomarkers for bacterial infections. The review is well-written with current and up-to-date citations. The figure panels are good and clear in their message.

1. Maybe the authors can add a possible figure in relation to section 4.5 and highlight the potential methods for targeting lncRNAs for therapeutic goals.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report (New Reviewer)

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The review deals with the lncRNAs in connection with bacterial infections. The topic is very hot, the matter of non-coding RNAs and lncRNAs especially is broad, so review in the field could be of interest for many readers.

 

Please, mention briefly in a few paragraphs also the other functions of lncRNAs like differentiation, development, cancerogenesis, mental disorders, etc.

Table 1 is well made. It would be of benefit to arrange such summarizing tables in other sections and subsections as well.

Fig.in the Abstract seems not to be informative enough, try to formulate the idea in the text.

Fig. 2 is not useful and informative, change it into table.

Fig. 5 is not demonstrative enough, try to better both the picture and the legend.

 

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

This manuscript is a resubmission of an earlier submission. The following is a list of the peer review reports and author responses from that submission.

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

1. This review paper contains a significant amount of plagiarism. 40% of plagiarism indicates that the authors did not contribute/input their own ideas for writing this review paper. This could indicate a lack of original contribution or input from the authors in writing the review paper.

Authors must be needed to rewrite in their own words. Reorgnaize the review paper with new information from recent papers.

2. All images quality are also poor.

 

     

 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

na

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Liqin and their colleagues endeavored to present a comprehensive overview of the regulation of host long noncoding RNAs during bacterial infection. The role of long noncoding RNAs in infection and immune regulation is in its nascent stage of research, making it challenging to definitively assert their potential as diagnostic or therapeutic targets against bacterial infection. Nevertheless, the review article is sufficiently developed and holds promise for publication in CIMB after addressing the following issues.

Major concerns

1.      The language of the entire manuscript is very poor and seems to be an online translated version of another language. Please read the entire manuscript carefully and correct any language and grammar issues with the assistance of a native English speaker.

2.      Introduction lines 29-8; Bacteria are omnipresent and only a small proportion of them can cause infections and diseases in the host….. This entire para contains an extensive discussion about bacteria, their infections, symptoms, treatment, and diagnosis. Please revise this long story to focus on a succinct overview of the global burden of bacterial infections, treatment approaches, and the issue of drug resistance.

3.      The conclusion is overly lengthy; please condense it as much as possible.

 

4.      The resolution and contrast of all figures are inadequate; please improve them.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

   The language of the entire manuscript is very poor and seems to be an online translated version of another language. Please read the entire manuscript carefully and correct any language and grammar issues with the assistance of a native English speaker.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

1.       Why did authors specifically select bacterial infections for this review about long non-coding RNA?

2.       Figure1. Poor quality, not visible. Please improve the figure quality.

3.       Overall, the authors need to improve the quality of all the figures.

4.       What are the challenges in the way of using long non-coding RNA as therapeutic biomarkers? Please discuss and justify.

5.       Are there any clinical trials employing long non-coding RNA as therapeutic biomarkers? If so, please provide the details.

 

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The author must provide a table summarizing all lncRNA for therapeutic targets in bacterial diseases.

 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

n/a

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The manuscript is now significantly improved, and I recommend it for publication in its present form.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx