Next Article in Journal
Study of Amine Functionalized Mesoporous Carbon as CO2 Storage Materials
Next Article in Special Issue
Highly Specific L-Type Amino Acid Transporter 1 Inhibition by JPH203 as a Potential Pan-Cancer Treatment
Previous Article in Journal
Application of the HPLC Method in Parenteral Nutrition Assessment: Stability Studies of Ondansetron
Previous Article in Special Issue
PPO-Inhibiting Herbicides and Structurally Relevant Schiff Bases: Evaluation of Inhibitory Activities against Human Protoporphyrinogen Oxidase
 
 
Review
Peer-Review Record

The Effects of Conjugated Linoleic Acids on Cancer

Processes 2021, 9(3), 454; https://doi.org/10.3390/pr9030454
by Marko Dachev 1,*, Jana Bryndová 1, Milan Jakubek 2, Zdeněk Moučka 1 and Marian Urban 1
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Reviewer 3: Anonymous
Processes 2021, 9(3), 454; https://doi.org/10.3390/pr9030454
Submission received: 15 January 2021 / Revised: 24 February 2021 / Accepted: 25 February 2021 / Published: 3 March 2021
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Advances in Anticancer Agents)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The manuscript "Short review: The effects of conjugated linoleic acids on cancer" has some major problems which in my opinion turn its publication in Processes impossible.

  1. No table and figure are found in this review, which is unusual. It is really not good for readers.
  2. The English grammar should be checked.
  3. To obtain a publishable review, it will be necessary to critically evaluate the literature and point out the promising leads, while in this ms. the literature is described very superficially.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Major Modifications:

1) The introduction should be more structured. Starting with the first sentence by talking about CLA, and then talking about general fatty acids and going back to CLA is not clear enough. also starting with fatty acids general information and then describe CLA should be easier for the reader. 

2) the three first paragraphs are already talking about their effect but they are not even well defined. The overall structure needs to be revised.

3) A representative figure of CLA isomers would help.

4) The effects of CLA in animal models are described and later the effects of CLA in vivo are described, which means the same. This is not clear. The overall structure should be revised. 

5) An extensive discussion on the future of CLA in cancer and future outcomes should be discussed. 

6) Each paragraph is talking about a paper or two, it would have been nice to have different paragraphs combining the cancer type and CLA effects on these cancers, for a better structure.


Minor modifications
1) The first line in the introduction: CLA should be defined as it is the first time it appears in the text. It is defined in line 7, but is used in lane 1.

2)"Bialek at al." should be "et al."

3)In the paragraph "anti-cancer effects of CLA in human model, first line: "to be have", need to delete "be"

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

In the manuscript titled with “The effects of conjugated linoleic acids on cancer”, the authors briefly reviewed the anti-cancer effects of conjugated linoleic acids isomers on the proliferation and apoptosis of tumor cells both in vivo and in vitro.  The manuscript also discussed about the further study of the anti-cancer effects of conjugated linoleic acids. Overall, the manuscript is well written, and the structure of the article is consistent with the journal requirements.  

The following are my major comments:

1 I strongly suggest the authors add a figure to show the structure conjugated linoleic acids and the isomers.

2 Provide a diagram to show the model, mechanism or possible pathways that CLA involved in the anti-cancer activities.

Minor comment:

In the second line from the bottom, change “Recent data research on CLA isomers showed” to “Recent research on CLA”.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

I recommend it for publication in the current form.

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

Thank you for your positive comments about the manuscript.

In the second resubmission we did the following changes:

1. We changed the quality of the figures. 
2. We rewrote the author's contribution.
3. We added more information in the tables (CLA effects).
4. The Introduction and conclusion were revised.

 

Reviewer 2 Report

The overall structure of the paper has been modified and it is easier now to follow and read the review. Figures have been added and help the reader.

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

Thank you for your positive comments about the manuscript.

In the second resubmission we did the following changes:

1. We changed the quality of the figures. 
2. We rewrote the author's contribution.
3. We added more information in the tables (CLA effects).
4. The Introduction and conclusion were revised.

Back to TopTop