Next Article in Journal
Ceftazidime-Avibactam Regimens for the Treatment of Bacteremic and Non-Bacteremic Episodes of Carbapenemase-Producing Enterobacterales Infections in Immunosuppressed Patients
Next Article in Special Issue
Validation of Guanidine-EDTA as a Preservative Agent for the Analysis of miRNAs and mRNAs in Blood Samples of Chagas Disease Patients
Previous Article in Journal
Development of a Novel Sandwich ELISA Test for the Detection of Antibodies Against Rickettsia
Previous Article in Special Issue
Immunotherapeutics Combining a Recombinant Chimeric Protein, Monophosphoryl Lipid A, and Miltefosine Against Visceral Leishmaniasis
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Pentraxin 3 Levels Reflect Inflammatory and Parasitic Activity in Human Visceral Leishmaniasis

Pathogens 2025, 14(12), 1299; https://doi.org/10.3390/pathogens14121299
by Lucyo Flávio Bezerra Diniz 1,2,3, Milena Xavier Silva Barbosa 4,5, Samuel Ricarte de Aquino 2,6, Anderson da Costa Armstrong 2, Carlos Dornels Freire de Souza 1,5 and Rodrigo Feliciano Carmo 1,4,5,*
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2:
Reviewer 3: Anonymous
Pathogens 2025, 14(12), 1299; https://doi.org/10.3390/pathogens14121299
Submission received: 18 November 2025 / Revised: 16 December 2025 / Accepted: 17 December 2025 / Published: 18 December 2025

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The study investigates the association between plasma PTX3 levels, parasite load, and PTX3 gene polymorphisms (rs1840680 and rs2305619) in 24 patients with VL. The authors find a positive correlation with parasitic load and cytokines involved in both pro- and anti-inflammatory responses. The manuscript is well written, and the hypothesis, scope, results and discussion are easy to follow, and some potential limitations are also mentioned by the authors. 

Minor comment

I would like read more on the timeline of the levels of acute phase proteins like PTX3, once the trigger is resolved and a comment on the timing of PTX3 assay after patient treatment.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

1.- Do you have any reazon for the long time to colect the samples. It was 5 years for 35 patients?'

2.- Do you have any reazon for the aplication of different treatment.??

3.- Do you have any reazon to use different methods for diagnosis 

4.-  Do you know which species of Leishmania are producing the diseases in the studied patients??

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Minor comments:

Bibliographic references:

Check that references 1 and 2 are correct, as the data reported do not always appear in these articles or are not exactly the same.

L.54: The numbers reported do not appear to be exactly the same as those indicated in the publication, and some of the data mentioned in the manuscript do not appear in this publication.

L.58: It should be verified that reference 5 is appropriate.

L.73: It should be verified that reference 17 is appropriate.

 

Materials and methods

  1. 55-56: It is stated that “diagnosis is based on parasitological confirmation by bone marrow or spleen aspiration, molecular detection by qPCR, and serological tests such as rK39 or ELISA.” Is parasitological confirmation on bone marrow or spleen samples performed by microscopy? And are molecular detection by qPCR and serological tests such as rK39 or ELISA performed from peripheral blood? Perhaps it should be specified at least once in the text that this is an rk39 immuno-Chromatographic Test (ICT).

L.102: Was the standard deviation of 1.24 ng/ml determined from reference 15? Because the value indicated is slightly different from that in this article.

 

Main comment:

L.228 (and L.297): perhaps temper, as the results indicate that the difference was not significant (p=0.07). Perhaps indicate in the materials and methods how long after treatment the patients were sampled after treatment to detect PTX3. Was it after 12 months or less? If it was less (soon after treatment – thus the result will depend on the treatment and its duration if the PTX3 measurement is performed shortly after the end of treatment), the patient may have started to feel better, but did the parasite load decrease enough for the inflammation markers to decrease as well? This could explain the small significant difference, which might have been greater if the sample had been analyzed a longer time after treatment. Was the parasite load measured after treatment?

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Back to TopTop