Applications of Nanomaterials for Theranostics of Melanoma
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The authors present an overview on the use of nanomaterials for theranostics of melanoma. The manuscript comprises an “Introduction of melanoma” and the remaining topics are focused on “Molecular Imaging” which includes the main medical imaging technologies namely computed tomography (CT) imaging, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) imaging, optical imaging, photoacoustic imaging and positron emission tomography (PET) imaging.
These techniques are described along with selected illustrative examples of the use of nanomaterials. Overall, the topics could have been presented in more depth/more details. The manuscript cannot be consider a review article with all recent contribution on applications of nanomaterials for theranostics of melanoma. Nevertheless, the manuscript is well written and can be useful for those unfamiliar with Molecular Imaging techniques.
Required minor changes:
- In the introduction – the first paragraph should include more update information.
- The quality of the images should be improved
- In page 4 (lines 156/157) – “Fluorescence imaging is highly safe and sensitive, enabling fast, dynamic, real-time monitoring, but has very low tissue penetration.” - This sentence is very categorical since there are ways to overcome this problem (see pages 9 and 10)
- In page (line 213) – replace “SPET” by “SPECT”
Author Response
Dear reviewer:
Thank you for your letter and the reviewers’ comments concerning our manuscript entitled “Applications of Nanomaterials for Theranostics of Melanoma”. The comments are all valuable and very helpful for revision and improving our paper. We have studied comments carefully and have made point-by-point corrections as reviewers suggested. The main corrections in the paper (marked in red in revised paper) and the responds to the reviewer’s comments are as flowing:
Required minor changes:
Q1: In the introduction – the first paragraph should include more update information.
Reply: We have added update information in first paragraph.”With recent development of clinical trials for triple therapy (combined BRAF/MEK inhibition with PD‐1 blockade) and drug tolerance to target therapy analyzed at single cell level in melanoma, we expect that the combination of treatments can not only enhance treatment efficacy but also prevent the emergence of drug resistance.” (page 1-2, line 41-44)
Q2: The quality of the images should be improved.
Reply: We try our best to improve the quality of merging pictures, but we can’t get some of the original pictures from the paper author.
Q3: In page 4 (lines 156/157) – “Fluorescence imaging is highly safe and sensitive, enabling fast, dynamic, real-time monitoring, but has very low tissue penetration.” - This sentence is very categorical since there are ways to overcome this problem (see pages 9 and 10).
Reply: Thank for your advices. The sentence have revised as “Fluorescence imaging is highly safe and sensitive, enabling fast, dynamic, real-time monitoring, but is difficult to do accurate quantitative analysis in vivo.” (page 4, lines 158-159)
Q4: In page (line 213) – replace “SPET” by “SPECT”.
Reply: SPET was replaced by SPECT, Thank you!
Once again, thank you for your hard work for our manuscript!
Sincerely Yours,
Yongfeng Zhao
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Dear Editor,
the manuscript of Guanqiao Jin et al. intitle “Applications of Nanomaterials for Theranostics of Melanoma” is a good review that highlight the role of nanotechnologies in the diagnosis and treatment of melanoma.
The review is well written and in line with the scope of the journal.
In my opinion, the review could be suitable for the publication in Journal of NanoTheranostics after the following minor revision:
Abstract
More information about the aim and the structure of the review should be added to the abstract paragraph
Introduction
Similarly, Author should expand the aim of the review “This review is focused on the recent progress on the treatments of malignant melanoma by theranostic nanoparticles.” in the Introduction paragraph
Melanoma in vitro and ex vitro
This paragraph reported vey limited information about the in vitro and ex vitro model of melanoma. The authors should expand this paragraph with the most recent data about the experimental model of melanoma or remove it.
Fig.1
The table, the mainly the SPECT image, is the poor quality.
Fig.2
TEM image needs a more accurate description. Type of sample, description of tissue etc.
Fig.4
see comment of FIG.1
Fig. 6
see comment of FIG.1
Conclusions
Authors should perform a focus on the immediate perspectives about the use of theranostic nanoparticles in the management of patients affected by melanoma.
Author Response
Dear reviewer:
Thank you for your letter and the reviewers’ comments concerning our manuscript entitled “Applications of Nanomaterials for Theranostics of Melanoma”. The comments are all valuable and very helpful for revision and improving our paper. We have studied comments carefully and have made point-by-point corrections as reviewers suggested. The main corrections in the paper (marked in red in revised paper) and the responds to the reviewer’s comments are as flowing:
Required minor changes:
Q1. Abstract-More information about the aim and the structure of the review should be added to the abstract paragraph.
Reply: We have formatted the abstract according to the requirements and format of ‘Journal of theranostics’. Thank you for your advice!
Q2. Introduction-Similarly, Author should expand the aim of the review ‘This review is focused on the recent progress on the treatments of malignant melanoma by theranostic nanoparticles.’ in the Introduction paragraph.
Reply: We have added update information in first paragraph. ‘With recent development of clinical trials for triple therapy (combined BRAF/MEK inhibition with PD‐1 blockade) and drug tolerance to target therapy analyzed at single cell level in melanoma, we expect that the combination of treatments can not only enhance treatment efficacy but also prevent the emergence of drug resistance.” (page 1-2, line 41-44)
Q3. Melanoma in vitro and ex vitro- This paragraph reported very limited information about the in vitro and ex vitro model of melanoma. The authors should expand this paragraph with the most recent data about the experimental model of melanoma or remove it.
Reply: We changed the subtitle. We focus on the application of cell line melanoma in animal models. (page 3, line 113)
Q4. Fig.1-6-The table, the mainly the SPECT image, is the poor quality.
Reply: We try our best to improve the quality of merging pictures, but we can’t get some of the original pictures from the paper author.
Q5. Fig.2-TEM image needs a more accurate description. Type of sample, description of tissue etc.
Reply: We have corrected the description. “Figure 2. a-d. TEM images of tagged (a) nanoparticle and untagged melanoma cells(b). Two pictures have demonstrated tagged cell (c) significantly increased signal but minimally increased in photoacoustic signal (d) compared with untagged melanoma. Reproduced from [61] with permission.” (page 7, line 261-263)
Q6. Conclusions-Authors should perform a focus on the immediate perspectives about the use of theranostic nanoparticles in the management of patients affected by melanoma.
Reply: We have added immediate perspectives in conclusions. “Despite the challenges mentioned above, nanomaterials for theranostics in molecular imaging have shown great promise in treating melanoma. New nanomaterials for theranostics in molecular imaging may be designed to have higher therapeutic loading capacity and a tunable payload releasing profile. Recently developed genome editing technology may also provide a great opportunity in nanomaterials for theranostics in molecular imaging for treating melanoma. “(page 11-12, line 444-449)
Once again, thank you for your hard work for our manuscript!
Sincerely Yours,
Yongfeng Zhao
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
