Next Article in Journal
The Prevalence, Seroprevalence, and Risk Factors of Tick-Borne Encephalitis Virus in Dogs in Lithuania, a Highly Endemic State
Previous Article in Journal
Phenotypic Characterization of Recombinant Marek’s Disease Virus in Live Birds Validates Polymorphisms Associated with Virulence
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Prophylactic Treatment with Baloxavir Protects Mice from Lethal Infection with Influenza A and B Viruses

Viruses 2023, 15(11), 2264; https://doi.org/10.3390/v15112264
by Keita Fukao 1,†, Takeshi Noshi 1,†, Shinya Shano 2, Kaoru Baba 2, Kenji Sato 1, Masashi Sakuramoto 1, Naohisa Kitade 1, Hideki Tanioka 1, Shinji Kusakabe 1 and Takao Shishido 1,*
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Viruses 2023, 15(11), 2264; https://doi.org/10.3390/v15112264
Submission received: 2 October 2023 / Revised: 7 November 2023 / Accepted: 9 November 2023 / Published: 16 November 2023
(This article belongs to the Section Viral Immunology, Vaccines, and Antivirals)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

See attached file.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Comments on the Quality of English Language

English is o.k.  Lines 41-43 needs to be reworded: "As neuraminidase..., prophylactic use." This is not a complete sentence.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

In this manuscript, the authors conducted an assessment of the prophylactic efficacy of Baloxavir in inhibiting influenza A and B virus infections in a mouse model. Furthermore, they established a correlation between plasma concentration at the time of infection and the required concentration for virus inhibition. The story is straightforward and well written and important for the drug treatment of the influenza virus. However, the supplementary materials are missing. It would be great if the author could also provide the supplementary documents for further consideration.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

On my comment #3 the authors could supply or refer to supplemental data, which contains the independent data set to which the authors refer in their amended text.  

On comment #4 the authors could include the text they wrote in their response: "...the difference in administration route is not considered to be a major problem."  This would clarify for readers that the authors acknowledge the difference in the route of administration but note that they believe this will not affect their study.

Finally, in comment #5 can the new text that was inserted be substantiated with supplemental data - since the preliminary experiments were already performed?

 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

None.

Back to TopTop