Next Article in Journal
HIV UTR, LTR, and Epigenetic Immunity
Next Article in Special Issue
Evaluation of EPISEQ SARS-CoV-2 and a Fully Integrated Application to Identify SARS-CoV-2 Variants from Several Next-Generation Sequencing Approaches
Previous Article in Journal
Dysregulated Immune Responses in SARS-CoV-2-Infected Patients: A Comprehensive Overview
Previous Article in Special Issue
B-Cell-Epitope-Based Fluorescent Quantum Dot Biosensors for SARS-CoV-2 Enable Highly Sensitive COVID-19 Antibody Detection
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Viruses
Volume 14
Issue 5
10.3390/v14051083
Review Report
viruses-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
Review
Peer-Review Record

Pivoting Novel Exosome-Based Technologies for the Detection of SARS-CoV-2

Viruses 2022, 14(5), 1083; https://doi.org/10.3390/v14051083
by Christine Happel, Chariz Peñalber-Johnstone and Danilo A. Tagle *
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Viruses 2022, 14(5), 1083; https://doi.org/10.3390/v14051083
Submission received: 19 April 2022 / Revised: 12 May 2022 / Accepted: 16 May 2022 / Published: 18 May 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Novel Diagnostic Technologies for SARS-CoV-2 and Other Emerging Viruses)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The review highlights the potential of exosomes for the detection of SARS-CoV-2. 

Some comments need to be addressed: 

Line 99: “Because antigen tests are qualitative, they can also be inaccurately interpreted”

Why can they be inaccurately interpreted for being qualitative? Maybe those whose results are read visually/by the naked eyed, but there are antigen tests that are read by a reader o that are accompanied by a colour card for avoiding the misinterpretation. Please complete the explanation. 

Line 109: This statement is very general, not all the serology tests give high false positive rate, cross-reactivity with similar viruses and low sensitivity. Serology tests have disadvantages, but not those explained. Or, at least, that statements only apply to some tests, but it is very test-dependent.

Lines 203-205: Three panels of samples are defined to be tested. However, cross-testing with other viruses is missing. Is this panel included in the study?

Line 254: SERS, surface enhanced raman spectroscopy. Please be consistent with the name also indicated in Figure 2.

Line 336: A word is missing between “and” and “are”.

Line 439: Please rephrase the sentence “elucidate indicate prognostic biomarkers”.

Figure 2: In the last column, there is a typing mistake “Raman” instead of “Ramen”. Furthermore, align with correction in line 254.

Are these three technologies already published? Or already applied to any other pathogen?

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Pivoting Novel Exosome-based Technologies for the Detection 2 of SARS-CoV-2

The review discussed an up to date topic that is interesting to millions of scientists because of COVID-19 pandemic.

  1. Abstract is too long and has repetitive sentences that can be omitted.
  2. Post-Acute Sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection (PASC): What is the reason for this part? Authors had to describe the rational of using Exosomes in managing post COVID-19 in more details otherwise this part is not relevant to the main topic.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Back to TopTop