Next Article in Journal
Clinical Protocol to Prevent Thrombogenic Effect of Liver-Derived Mesenchymal Cells for Cell-Based Therapies
Next Article in Special Issue
iPla2β Deficiency Suppresses Hepatic ER UPR, Fxr, and Phospholipids in Mice Fed with MCD Diet, Resulting in Exacerbated Hepatic Bile Acids and Biliary Cell Proliferation
Previous Article in Journal
EGFR/ErbB Inhibition Promotes OPC Maturation up to Axon Engagement by Co-Regulating PIP2 and MBP
Previous Article in Special Issue
Single Cell RNA Sequencing Identifies Subsets of Hepatic Stellate Cells and Myofibroblasts in Liver Fibrosis
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Cells
Volume 8
Issue 8
10.3390/cells8080845
Review Report
cells-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

Printed Edition

A printed edition of this Special Issue is available at MDPI Books....
share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
Review
Peer-Review Record

Current Status in Testing for Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease (NAFLD) and Nonalcoholic Steatohepatitis (NASH)

Cells 2019, 8(8), 845; https://doi.org/10.3390/cells8080845
by Hannah K. Drescher 1,*, Sabine Weiskirchen 2 and Ralf Weiskirchen 2,*
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2:
Rolf Teschke
Reviewer 3: Anonymous
Cells 2019, 8(8), 845; https://doi.org/10.3390/cells8080845
Submission received: 23 July 2019 / Revised: 5 August 2019 / Accepted: 6 August 2019 / Published: 7 August 2019
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Cellular and Molecular Mechanisms Underlying the Pathogenesis of Hepatic Fibrosis)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Look at the attachement

 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

This is an interesting review article on a clinically important issue. As a valid biomarker is not available, new efforts are needed to diagnose NASH with some degree of certainty. Under these perspectives, some more aspects should be discussed.

My points are:

Fig 1 is interesting and should benefit from adding references for the items. The figure could be moved more at the end, avoiding new order of the reference list.  Please discuss CYP 2E1 relationship of NASH to ASH, referencing for instance: Biomedicines 2018: 6, 106. Also, are in NASH CYP 2E1 exosomes present in the blood as in ALD? To make the paper more interesting, you may discuss the relationship between NASH and adipose tissue. What about the inztestinal microbiome?

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

This is a very well written and comprehensive review addressing many aspects of NAFLD; maybe the tittle should be more general, not only biomarkers for detection of NAFLD.

I have a few comments that the authors may want to address to improve the quality of the manuscript.

-Introduction line 2: non-insulin dependent diabetes, this classification is not correct, instead of this use type 2 diabetes.

-Line 248-249- might be not exclusively related to NAFLD, include not in the phrase.

-Line 282- use well studied instead of well-study

- Line 283-Confer reference 66 is not approbatively cited in the text

Line 294, 295,296- include references for this phrase

Line 31,317,318- include references for the biomarkers cited.

Line 415,416,417- I would be more cautious, the reference  cited by the authors is of a metanalysis that included  only retrospective studies,  the method had high accuracy for diagnosis of significant or advanced fibrosis and cirrhosis, but it was not evaluated if it was appropriate to detect progression of fibrosis. “Therefore, this image modality is highly suitable to detect progression and treatment response in patients with chronic liver disease.”   For example :may be highly suitable…..

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Nice work

Back to TopTop