Peer Review History

Original SubmissionAugust 13, 2023
Decision Letter - Junji Xing, Editor

PONE-D-23-25133Dysfunction of peripheral somatic and autonomic nervous system in patients with severe forms of Crohn's disease on biological therapy with TNFα inhibitors – a single center study.PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Hlava,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Nov 10 2023 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.
  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.
  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.
If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Junji Xing, Ph.D.

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at 

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and 

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. We note that the grant information you provided in the ‘Funding Information’ and ‘Financial Disclosure’ sections do not match. 

When you resubmit, please ensure that you provide the correct grant numbers for the awards you received for your study in the ‘Funding Information’ section.

3. Please review your reference list to ensure that it is complete and correct. If you have cited papers that have been retracted, please include the rationale for doing so in the manuscript text, or remove these references and replace them with relevant current references. Any changes to the reference list should be mentioned in the rebuttal letter that accompanies your revised manuscript. If you need to cite a retracted article, indicate the article’s retracted status in the References list and also include a citation and full reference for the retraction notice.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: This manuscript investigated neurological issues in severe Crohn's disease patients on anti-TNFα therapy. It found a high prevalence of peripheral neuropathy (36.7%) and cardiovascular autonomic neuropathy (56.7%). Risk factors included age, therapy duration, BMI, and disease activity. The study also highlighted the importance of neurological assessments in these patients. However,in the manuscript, there are areas where refinement and improvement are still necessary.

1. The figure legend needs to be supplemented in detail, for example, the numbers on the bars in Figure 1 represent the number of individuals, and it would be best if the statistical differences (p-values) could be reflected on the figure.

2. Please present the results of the two questionnaires in the form of tables or figures

3. Many of the data descriptions in the manuscript cannot be directly obtained from the provided tables and figures. Please provide additional information, for example, but not limited to the results of blood samples and the data from lines 296 to 302.

Reviewer #2: The submitted manuscript has done an excellent job of demonstrating a high prevalence of peripheral neuropathy in patients with severe Crohn's disease on anti-TNF alpha therapy. Specific risk factors have also been presented which are responsible for the development of this neuropathy in patients.

Overall the manuscript is very detailed, well explained and the data has been presented in a clear manner. However, there are certain minor errors which need to be addressed :-

1. Page 4, Line 58 : The spelling of "inflamatory" is incorrect.

2. Page 6, Line 101 : It is suggested to replace the word "realized" with "conducted".

3. Page 6, Line 107 : Please keep the format of anti-TNF alpha consistent.

4. Page 7, Line 131 : What are "ionts"?

5. Page 7, Line 135 : "Coeliac Disease" is misspelled.

6. Page 14, Line 276 : The spelling of "melittus" is incorrect.

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

**********

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

Revision 1

Dear reviewers and editors,

First of all, I would like to thank you very much for your beneficial recommendations and interesting comments to our manuscript. All your comments were reflected during revision of our manuscript.

Below I would like to present you these manuscript changes in details:

Journal Requirements:

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming.

- Manuscript was checked and corrected based on journal requirements according to sent pdf documents.

2. We note that the grant information you provided in the ‘Funding Information’ and ‘Financial Disclosure’ sections do not match. When you resubmit, please ensure that you provide the correct grant numbers for the awards you received for your study in the ‘Funding Information’ section.

- Grant information will be checked during resubmitting of the revised version of our manuscript.

- Based on the internal requirements of our faculty (for reasons of financing the publication process), we would like to ask you to cite our funding statement (Supported by the Ministry of Health, Czech Republic - conceptual development of research organization, Motol University Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic 00064203.) somewhere as part of our manuscript.

3. Please review your reference list to ensure that it is complete and correct. If you have cited papers that have been retracted, please include the rationale for doing so in the manuscript text, or remove these references and replace them with relevant current references. Any changes to the reference list should be mentioned in the rebuttal letter that accompanies your revised manuscript. If you need to cite a retracted article, indicate the article’s retracted status in the References list and also include a citation and full reference for the retraction notice.

- All references were checked (if you have a problem with some specific reference, please notify us of this and we will certainly reflect that).

Reviewer's Comments to the Author

Reviewer #1:

This manuscript investigated neurological issues in severe Crohn's disease patients on anti-TNFα therapy. It found a high prevalence of peripheral neuropathy (36.7%) and cardiovascular autonomic neuropathy (56.7%). Risk factors included age, therapy duration, BMI, and disease activity. The study also highlighted the importance of neurological assessments in these patients. However,in the manuscript, there are areas where refinement and improvement are still necessary.

Comments:

1. The figure legend needs to be supplemented in detail, for example, the numbers on the bars in Figure 1 represent the number of individuals, and it would be best if the statistical differences (p-values) could be reflected on the figure.

- Figure legends were implemented in details according to your beneficial recommendation.

- Figure 1 summarizes the results of the four main types of measurements in our study; correlations were not included in the figure mainly due to the small number of patients in our study. The graph in Figure 1 was modified in response to your comments for better reproducibility of results - data labels of results, vertical axis, percentages of normal and pathological measurement results.

2. Please present the results of the two questionnaires in the form of tables or figures

- Manuscript was edited based on your requirements, the table with the results of both questionnaires was added to the manuscript.

3. Many of the data descriptions in the manuscript cannot be directly obtained from the provided tables and figures. Please provide additional information, for example, but not limited to the results of blood samples and the data from lines 296 to 302.

- Manuscript was edited based on your requirements, table with source data of our study was added as the separate additional file with our resubmitted manuscript.

Reviewer #2:

The submitted manuscript has done an excellent job of demonstrating a high prevalence of peripheral neuropathy in patients with severe Crohn's disease on anti-TNF alpha therapy. Specific risk factors have also been presented which are responsible for the development of this neuropathy in patients. Overall the manuscript is very detailed, well explained and the data has been presented in a clear manner. However, there are certain minor errors which need to be addressed:

1. Page 4, Line 58 : The spelling of "inflamatory" is incorrect.

- Manuscript was corrected according to your recommendation.

2. Page 6, Line 101 : It is suggested to replace the word "realized" with "conducted".

- Manuscript was corrected according to your recommendation.

3. Page 6, Line 107 : Please keep the format of anti-TNF alpha consistent.

- Manuscript was corrected according to your recommendation.

4. Page 7, Line 131 : What are "ionts"?

- Ionts were incorrectly mentioned in the text instead of electrolytes, manuscript was corrected.

5. Page 7, Line 135 : "Coeliac Disease" is misspelled.

- Manuscript was corrected according to your recommendation.

6. Page 14, Line 276 : The spelling of "melittus" is incorrect.

- Manuscript was corrected according to your recommendation.

Attachments
Attachment
Submitted filename: Response to reviewers.docx
Decision Letter - Junji Xing, Editor

Dysfunction of peripheral somatic and autonomic nervous system in patients with severe forms of Crohn's disease on biological therapy with TNFα inhibitors – a single center study.

PONE-D-23-25133R1

Dear Dr. Hlava,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Junji Xing, Ph.D.

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #1: All comments have been addressed

Reviewer #2: All comments have been addressed

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

6. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: The author's prompt and diligent response to the reviewers' comments, coupled with their thorough revisions, has significantly enhanced both the professionalism and readability of the manuscript. I wholeheartedly support its publication.

Reviewer #2: The authors have done a good job in addressing the issues raised by the reviewers-they have been clear in their explanation.

**********

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

**********

Formally Accepted
Acceptance Letter - Junji Xing, Editor

PONE-D-23-25133R1

Dysfunction of peripheral somatic and autonomic nervous system in patients with severe forms of Crohn's disease on biological therapy with TNFα inhibitors – a single center study.

Dear Dr. Hlava:

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at plosone@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Junji Xing

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Open letter on the publication of peer review reports

PLOS recognizes the benefits of transparency in the peer review process. Therefore, we enable the publication of all of the content of peer review and author responses alongside final, published articles. Reviewers remain anonymous, unless they choose to reveal their names.

We encourage other journals to join us in this initiative. We hope that our action inspires the community, including researchers, research funders, and research institutions, to recognize the benefits of published peer review reports for all parts of the research system.

Learn more at ASAPbio .