Engineered Cell Membrane-Camouflaged Nanomaterials for Biomedical Applications

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

While the review by Guan, Xing and Liu is informative, there are significant issues with it that are noted below.  It should be clear what the focus of this review became starting with the material related to Figure 2.  This reviewer is not under the impression that permission to use a figure or parts of a figure also allows for the direct use of all or part of the figure caption from an article.  The quality of some of the figures and panels of figures are insufficient for publication. 

Line 30:  “ambit” is an uncommonly used word.  The authors should consider using a more commonly employed synonym. 

Lines 49-50:  “for nanoparticles” is repeated in the sentence. 

Line 116:  1,2-distearoyl-sn-glycero-3-phosphoethanolamine’s abbreviation may need to be changed to “DSPE”. 

Lines 125-130:  The discussion of melittin seems out of place here.  While melittin is shown in Figure 2, the caption of Figure 2 does not mention it. 

Lines 140-148:  Portions of sentences and sentences in the caption are copied directly from sentences in the Figure 1 caption in reference 29.  The comment above regarding lines 125-130 prompted looking into the original reference. 

Lines 191-200:  The caption of Figure 3 does not sufficiently explain what the various abbreviations are, nor does the text.  Portions of sentences and sentences in the caption are copied directly from sentences in the Figure 1 caption in reference 33. 

Lines 237-251:  The caption of Figure 4 does not sufficiently explain what the various abbreviations are, nor does the text.  Portions of sentences and sentences in the caption are copied directly from sentences in figure captions in reference 43. 

Lines 296-302:  Portions of sentences and sentences in the caption are copied directly from sentences in figure captions in reference 50.

Lines 345-354:  Portions of sentences and sentences in the caption are copied directly from sentences in figure captions in reference 61.

Lines 502-510:  Portions of sentences and sentences in the caption are copied directly from sentences in figure captions in references 124 and 130.

Lines 545-553:  Portions of sentences and sentences in the caption are copied directly from sentences in figure captions in references 111 and 113.

Lines 594-600:  Portions of sentences and sentences in the caption are copied directly from sentences in figure captions in references 78 and 148.

Lines 651-660:  Portions of sentences and sentences in the caption are copied directly from sentences in figure captions in references 116 and 106.

Lines 771-777:  A sentence in the caption is copied directly from the Figure 1 caption in reference 105, which is published by the American Chemical Society, not Frontiers Media S.A.

Lines 833-837:  Sentences in the caption are copied directly from sentences in figure captions in references 36 and 145.

Lines 863-867:  This reviewer does not have access to the journal in reference 102.  However, in light of the other figure captions in the article, this reviewer is concerned. 

Author Response

We feel great thanks for the reviewers' suggestions. According to the suggestions, we have made extensive corrections to the manuscript.

1. Line 30:  “ambit” is an uncommonly used word.  The authors should consider using a more commonly employed synonym. 

Reply: Thanks for the suggestion, we have revised the “ambit” with “With the rapid development of” in line 30.

2. Lines 49-50:  “for nanoparticles” is repeated in the sentence. 

Reply: Thanks for the suggestions. We have revised it in line 49-50.

3. Line 116:  1,2-distearoyl-sn-glycero-3-phosphoethanolamine’s abbreviation may need to be changed to “DSPE”. 

Reply: Thanks for the suggestions. We have revised it as “DSPE” in line 116.

4. Lines 125-130:  The discussion of melittin seems out of place here.  While melittin is shown in Figure 2, the caption of Figure 2 does not mention it. 

Reply: Thanks for the reviewers’ kind suggestions. We have carefully revised it and re-written this part according to the reviewer’s suggestion, where the change with red mark in Lines 118-121.

5. Lines 140-148:  Portions of sentences and sentences in the caption are copied directly from sentences in the Figure 1 caption in reference 29.  The comment above regarding lines 125-130 prompted looking into the original reference. 

Reply: Thanks for the reviewers’ suggestions. We have re-written this part according to the Reviewer’s suggestion, where the change with red mark were shown in Lines 133-140.

6. Lines 191-200:  The caption of Figure 3 does not sufficiently explain what the various abbreviations are, nor does the text.  Portions of sentences and sentences in the caption are copied directly from sentences in the Figure 1 caption in reference 33. 

Reply: Thanks for the reviewers’ suggestions. We have reorganized the abbreviations and re-written this part according to the reviewer’s suggestion, where the change with red mark were shown in Lines 186-194.

7. Lines 237-251:  The caption of Figure 4 does not sufficiently explain what the various abbreviations are, nor does the text.  Portions of sentences and sentences in the caption are copied directly from sentences in figure captions in reference 43. 

Reply: Thanks for the reviewers’ suggestions. We have revised this part according to the reviewer’s suggestion, where the change with red mark were shown in Lines 233-241.

8. Lines 296-302:  Portions of sentences and sentences in the caption are copied directly from sentences in figure captions in reference 50.

Reply: Thanks for the reviewers’ suggestions. We have re-written the caption according to the reviewer’s suggestion, where the change with red mark were shown in Lines 293-299.

9. Lines 345-354:  Portions of sentences and sentences in the caption are copied directly from sentences in figure captions in reference 61.

Reply: Thanks for the reviewers’ suggestions. We have re-written the caption according to the reviewer’s suggestion, where the change with red mark were shown in Lines 344-351.

10. Lines 502-510:  Portions of sentences and sentences in the caption are copied directly from sentences in figure captions in references 124 and 130.

Reply: Thanks for the reviewers’ suggestions. We have re-written the caption according to the reviewer’s suggestion, where the change with red mark were shown in Lines 503-507.

11. Lines 545-553:  Portions of sentences and sentences in the caption are copied directly from sentences in figure captions in references 111 and 113.

Reply: Thanks for the reviewers’ suggestions. We have re-written the captionaccording to the reviewer’s suggestion, where the change with red mark were shown in Lines 545-557.

12. Lines 594-600:  Portions of sentences and sentences in the caption are copied directly from sentences in figure captions in references 78 and 148.

Reply: Thanks for the reviewers’ suggestions. We have re-written the captionaccording to the reviewer’s suggestion, where the change with red mark were shown in Lines 599-604.

13. Lines 651-660:  Portions of sentences and sentences in the caption are copied directly from sentences in figure captions in references 116 and 106.

Reply: Thanks for the reviewers’ suggestions. We have re-written the caption according to the reviewer’s suggestion, where the change with red mark were shown in Lines 659-663.

14. Lines 771-777: A sentence in the caption is copied directly from the Figure 1 caption in reference 105, which is published by the American Chemical Society, not Frontiers Media S.A.

Reply: Thanks for the reviewers’ suggestions. We have re-written the caption according to the reviewer’s suggestion, where the change with red mark were shown in Lines 777-783. As the suggestions, we have corrected the “Frontiers Media S.A” with “American Chemical Society”.

15. Lines 833-837:  Sentences in the caption are copied directly from sentences in figure captions in references 36 and 145.

Reply: Thanks for the reviewers’ suggestions. We have re-written this part according to the reviewer’s suggestion, where the change with red mark were shown in Lines 840-845.

16. Lines 863-867:  This reviewer does not have access to the journal in reference 102.  However, in light of the other figure captions in the article, this reviewer is concerned. 

Reply: Thanks for the reviewers’ suggestions. We have re-written this part according to the Reviewer’s suggestion, where the change can be found in the the Lines 874-881.

Reviewer 2 Report

Overall this is a very thorough and comprehensive review on the numerous modifications possible, being used and developed in the 'camouflage' of cell membranes and their applications for biomedical purposes.

I dont have any specific issues or criticisms apart from concerns related to the length of the manuscript which makes it more akin to a book chapter rather than a review paper.  

Author Response

Thanks for the reviewers’ kind suggestions. We have made some revisions with red mark in the revised manuscript. 

Reviewer 3 Report

The review entitled "Engineered Cell Membrane-Camouflaged Nanomaterials for Biomedical Applications" is well written and well prepared. It is well structured and overall will be of interest to the reader. 

I have only a few small things to correct for this review:

- there are a few typographical errors in the text, so I recommend that the entire review is carefully reviewed and corrected.

- for the final version, pay attention to the layout of the chapter titles. For example, chapter 2.3. should be moved to the next page and not leave the title as the end of the page.

- unify the spaces of each cell in Table 2. On pages 12-15 you have simple spaces, but on page 16 you have large spaces for this table.

- Last, unify the spaces after each chapter. This is mainly a small space for title of chapters 3.1.4 (line 578) and 3.1.6. (line 631).

Author Response

Thanks for the reviewers' kind suggestions. We have carefully corrected the errors in the revised manuscript.

1. There are a few typographical errors in the text, so I recommend that the entire review is carefully reviewed and corrected.

Reply: Thanks for the reviewer’s suggestion. We have carefully corrected the errors in the revised manuscript.

2. For the final version, pay attention to the layout of the chapter titles. For example, chapter 2.3. should be moved to the next page and not leave the title as the end of the page.

Reply: Thanks for the reviewer’s suggestion. We have carefully corrected the errors with red mark in the revised manuscript.

3. Unify the spaces of each cell in Table 2. On pages 12-15 you have simple spaces, but on page 16 you have large spaces for this table.

Reply: Thanks for the reviewer’s kind suggestion. Based on the suggestions, we have made the corrections to make the spaces harmonized within the Table 2.

4. Last, unify the spaces after each chapter. This is mainly a small space for title of chapters 3.1.4 (line 578) and 3.1.6. (line 631).

Reply: Thanks for the reviewer’s suggestion. Based on the suggestions, we have made the corrections to make the spaces harmonized, where the change can be found in the the Line 582 and 636.