Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear authors: I find this to be a well-documented work and of great interest to those who care for children with these conditions. I only have one minor correction to request, which is: Please correct spp. in the whole text as it should not be written in italics. In addition, as a comment, I believe it should be emphasized that biological markers are not entirely specific and may present cross-reactions or false positives: In one case of proven Fusarium infection (case 7) GM at diagnosis was 10.1, it was a really high value as, in this case, it is a false-positive result. Best regards

Author Response

Letter of Response to Reviewers

Manuscript ID: jof-4126947 

Type: Communication 

Title: Feasibility of Allogeneic Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation Following Recent Invasive Mold Disease in Pediatric Patients

Dear Editors,

We appreciate the opportunity to address the reviewers’ constructive comments. We believe that each point has been fully addressed below, and we would be pleased to provide additional clarification if required. We have submitted a revised version of the manuscript that incorporates the reviewers’ suggestions and provides detailed responses to their questions.

The specific comments and our corresponding responses are presented below.

Response to Editor 1

Comment 1: Correct "spp." in the whole text as it should not be written in italics.

Response: The entire manuscript has been meticulously reviewed, and the term "spp." has been corrected. It now appears in standard text (not italics) in all instances, in accordance with international taxonomic standards.

Comment 2: Emphasize that biological markers are not entirely specific and may present cross-reactions or false positives (specifically Case 7 regarding Galactomannan and Fusarium).

Response: Thank you for your comment; we agree. We have integrated this important observation into the Discussion section. It was emphasized that biological markers are not entirely specific and may present cross-reactions or false negatives.

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

c

The authors of the paper entitled, “Feasibility of Allogeneic Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation Following Recent Invasive Mold Disease in Pediatric Patients”, provide data for ten children treated for invasive mold disease. The species isolated were Aspergillus spp (5 isolates) and Fusarium spp (4 isolates). However, since the data is only from ten children, the paper should be converted into a note. The MS does present promising data since these two species are difficult to treat. The same applies to the MIC data. About the percentages, it is advisable to use them when larger numbers of patients are provided. The other sections of the paper are too long for the data presented, especially the discussion.

Author Response

Letter of Response to Reviewers

Manuscript ID: jof-4126947 

Type: Communication 

Title: Feasibility of Allogeneic Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation Following Recent Invasive Mold Disease in Pediatric Patients

Dear Editors,

We appreciate the opportunity to address the reviewers’ constructive comments. We believe that each point has been fully addressed below, and we would be pleased to provide additional clarification if required. We have submitted a revised version of the manuscript that incorporates the reviewers’ suggestions and provides detailed responses to their questions.

The specific comments and our corresponding responses are presented below.

Response to Editor 2

Comment 1: Use of percentages is not recommended given the small number of patients.

Response: We agree and thank the reviewer for highlighting this issue. Accordingly, all percentages have been removed from the text. Data are now presented using absolute numbers to avoid erroneous statistical interpretations due to the sample size.

Comment 2: Since the data is only from ten children, the paper should be converted into a note. The sections, especially the discussion, are too long for the data presented.

Response: According to a formal communication received from the Assistant Editor, on 15 Jan 2026, the article type was updated from “brief report” to “Communication.” Considering the instructions for authors and article types available on the MDPI webpage (https://www.mdpi.com/about/article_types, accessed 09 Feb 2026), the authors believe that the current section length and structure meet the Journal of Fungi requirements for “Communications” and allow for a clear and concise presentation of the data. However, if the editor or reviewer prefers, we would be happy to shorten the text or edit the manuscript into a “note.”