Next Article in Journal
SOX9 Protein in Pancreatic Cancer Regulates Multiple Cellular Networks in a Cell-Specific Manner
Next Article in Special Issue
Assessment of the Humoral Immune Response Following COVID-19 Vaccination in Healthcare Workers: A One Year Longitudinal Study
Previous Article in Journal
Chronic Central Leptin Infusion Promotes an Anti-Inflammatory Cytokine Profile Related to the Activation of Insulin Signaling in the Gastrocnemius of Male Rats
 
 
Review
Peer-Review Record

Immune Response to SARS-CoV-2 Vaccines

Biomedicines 2022, 10(7), 1464; https://doi.org/10.3390/biomedicines10071464
by Navya Bellamkonda 1,†, Upendra Pradeep Lambe 2,†, Sonali Sawant 2, Shyam Sundar Nandi 2,*, Chiranjib Chakraborty 3 and Deepak Shukla 4,*
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2:
Biomedicines 2022, 10(7), 1464; https://doi.org/10.3390/biomedicines10071464
Submission received: 20 April 2022 / Revised: 27 May 2022 / Accepted: 30 May 2022 / Published: 21 June 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Emerging Issues in COVID Vaccine)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This article well describes the immune response to the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. However, there may be minor corrections and supplements necessary for the manuscrpt. Detailed comments and suggestion are listed below.

 

Minor

  • The authors described current vaccines, vaccine candidates and adjuvants. It would be better for the reader`s understanding, if they could provide a table for this contents.
  • It is necessary to supplement the conclusion of the thesis.
  • Check the spacing of the first line of the sentence.
  • It would be good to categorize the content numerically. Ex) 1. Inactivated viral vaccine candidates~, 1) Corona Vac; 2) BBIBP-CorV etc...

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

The review is an oversight on SARS-CoV-2 vaccines. This kind of overview is interesting to clear such an important subject in continuous evolution. The review is overall objective, well written and relatively easy to read. I have some major suggestions to make before publication:
-Chapter organization is insufficient. After the introduction there is non number coding. 

-It is necessary to introduce at least 1 figure and 1 tabella especially in the section of vaccine description efficacy and use

-The review is missing a conclusion and future highlights on vaccine use and management 

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

The authors have faced the highlighted issues according to suggestions. The article is now suitable for publication. 

Back to TopTop