Effects of Loigolactobacillus coryniformis K8 CECT 5711 on the Immune Response of Elderly Subjects to COVID-19 Vaccination: A Randomized Controlled Trial
, Francisco J. Formigo-Couceiro 3,†, Roi Veiga-Gutierrez 1,2, Jose A. Maldonado-Lobón 4, Ana M. Hermida-Cao 1,2, Carlos Rodriguez 4, Oscar Bañuelos 4, Mónica Olivares 4 and Ruth Blanco-Rojo 4,*Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Fernández-Ferreriro, et al., assessed the effect of the consumption of the probiotic Loigolactobacillus coryniformis K8 CECT 5711 on the immune response generated by the COVID-19 vaccine in an elderly population. They analyzed specific IgG and IgA antibodies and cytokines (INF-g and TGF-β) 56 days after the end of the immunization process and concluded that the administration of K8 may enhance the specific immune response against COVID-19 and may improve the COVID-19 vaccine-specific responses in elderly populations.
The manuscript is interesting, but some concerns need to be addressed. For example, as mentioned in lines 80-81, being diagnosed with an immunocompromising condition should be excluded from the study. However, in the table 1 there are subjects with different diseases such as Rheumatic diseases (about 29%) and it is not clear if they are under the immunosuppressive therapies. Also, if possible, the limitations of the study should be addressed.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
The article is well written, but I have some comments to make.
-On line 148-149 you say you used the Kruscall test, but when in the presence of two groups the Kruskal test is simply the Mann U Whitney test. So instead of Kruskal test, use Mann U Whitney test.
- On line 229 you say you only have 7 patients. Obviously this is not a number that defines a representative sample, thus any test performed with a group of 7 patients is the result of a not very serious analysis.
In Figure 2 you show a significant p-value computed between groups consisting of 6 and 10 patients. This result is absolutely inconclusive. Therefore, surely a bar plot is useful for the purpose of the experiment but a significant p-value distorts the literature because it is the result of a biased analysis.
Thus, I suggest that within the limitations of the study, such reflections are included.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
