Next Article in Journal
Quantifying Emission Factors and Setting Conditions of Use According to ECHA Chapter R.14 for a Spray Process Designed for Nanocoatings—A Case Study
Previous Article in Journal
A Stackable Triboelectric Nanogenerator for Wave-Driven Marine Buoys
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Preparation and Immune Effect of HEV ORF2 P206@PLGA Nanoparticles

Nanomaterials 2022, 12(4), 595; https://doi.org/10.3390/nano12040595
by Yifei Yang †, Zhenning Sun †, Huopeng Li, Jijing Tian, Mingyong Chen * and Tianlong Liu *
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Nanomaterials 2022, 12(4), 595; https://doi.org/10.3390/nano12040595
Submission received: 20 December 2021 / Revised: 28 January 2022 / Accepted: 3 February 2022 / Published: 10 February 2022

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This is an interesting study on the preparation and immune effect of HEV ORF2 P206@PLGA nanoparticles. The experiments showed that P206@PLGA has excellent biocompatibility and safety and can effectively induce animals to produce high antibody titer against HEV4. It has the potential to become a veterinary vaccine for the prevention of HEV. This could provide a new approach to HE prevention reducing the transmission of HEV in farms and protecting susceptible populations.

 

The introduction is appropriate

The methodology is properly described

Results are clearly presented with the help of tables and figures as well as supplementary materials

Discussion and conclusions are appropriate and clearly take into considerations methodology and results obtained in line with the aim of the study

Minor changes are indicated in the text.

 

The English language needs revision by a mother-tongue-speaker.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Thanks for your suggestion. Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Although authors have well-presented all in this paper, this reviewer does not feel that this paper regarding nanopreparation of the vaccine (P206@PLGA) shows any improvement and merits in formulation itself compared to P206 plus aluminum adjuvant. This is because Table 1 and Figure 4 failed to show improvement of vaccination activity in terms of positive conversion rate and anti-HEV antibody titer. Also, effectiveness with 20 ug/mice is not reachable level in terms of economics of the vaccine and real activity in human body.

Author Response

Thanks for your suggestion. Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

OK, some are acceptable. So, now this paper is acceptable.

Back to TopTop