Peer Review History

Original SubmissionAugust 15, 2023
Decision Letter - Fadi Aljamaan, Editor

PONE-D-23-25428Impact of COVID-19 vaccination on liver transplant recipients. Experience in a reference center in Mexico.PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Ignacio García-Juárez,

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 Feb 18 2024 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,

Fadi Aljamaan

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. Please provide additional details regarding participant consent. In the ethics statement in the Methods and online submission information, please ensure that you have specified (1) whether consent was informed and (2) what type you obtained (for instance, written or verbal, and if verbal, how it was documented and witnessed). If your study included minors, state whether you obtained consent from parents or guardians. If the need for consent was waived by the ethics committee, please include this information.

If you are reporting a retrospective study of medical records or archived samples, please ensure that you have discussed whether all data were fully anonymized before you accessed them and/or whether the IRB or ethics committee waived the requirement for informed consent. If patients provided informed written consent to have data from their medical records used in research, please include this information.

3. In this instance it seems there may be acceptable restrictions in place that prevent the public sharing of your minimal data. However, in line with our goal of ensuring long-term data availability to all interested researchers, PLOS’ Data Policy states that authors cannot be the sole named individuals responsible for ensuring data access (http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-acceptable-data-sharing-methods).

Data requests to a non-author institutional point of contact, such as a data access or ethics committee, helps guarantee long term stability and availability of data. Providing interested researchers with a durable point of contact ensures data will be accessible even if an author changes email addresses, institutions, or becomes unavailable to answer requests.

Before we proceed with your manuscript, please also provide non-author contact information (phone/email/hyperlink) for a data access committee, ethics committee, or other institutional body to which data requests may be sent. If no institutional body is available to respond to requests for your minimal data, please consider if there any institutional representatives who did not collaborate in the study, and are not listed as authors on the manuscript, who would be able to hold the data and respond to external requests for data access? If so, please provide their contact information (i.e., email address). Please also provide details on how you will ensure persistent or long-term data storage and availability.

4. Please include your full ethics statement in the ‘Methods’ section of your manuscript file. In your statement, please include the full name of the IRB or ethics committee who approved or waived your study, as well as whether or not you obtained informed written or verbal consent. If consent was waived for your study, please include this information in your statement as well. 

[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: Partly

Reviewer #2: Partly

**********

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: No

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: I was very happy because the topic presented in the article was from an area that I was specifically interested in.

Authors ''The risk in liver transplant (LT) patients

"has not been widely investigated," they said. This statement is unrealistic in my opinion. There are very serious studies written on this subject.

Please use the following studies to enrich the introduction and discussion sections of your article:

Akbulut S, Yagin FH, Sahin TT, Garzali IU, Tuncer A, Akyuz M, Bagci N, Barut B, Unsal S, Sarici KB, Saritas S, Ozer A, Bentli R, Colak C, Bayindir Y, Yilmaz S. Effect of COVID-19 Pandemic on Patients Who Have Undergone Liver Transplantation: Retrospective Cohort Study. J Clin Med. 2023;12(13):4466.

Akbulut S, Bagci N, Akyuz M, Garzali IU, Saritas H, Tamer M, Ince V, Unsal S, Aloun A, Yilmaz S. Effect of COVID-19 Pandemic on Patients Who Have Undergone Liver Transplantation Because of Hepatocellular Carcinoma. TransplantProc. 2023;55(5):1226-1230.

Akbulut S, Barut B, Garzali IU, Sarici KB, Tamer M, Unsal S, Karabulut E, Baskiran A, Bayindir Y, Yilmaz S. Effect of Pre-Transplant Covid-19 Exposure on Post-Liver Transplant Clinical Outcomes. TransplantProc. 2023;55(5):1176-1181.

Akbulut S, Sahin TT, Ince V, Yilmaz S. Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on clinicopathological features of transplant recipients with hepatocellular carcinoma: A case-control study. World J Clin Cases. 2022;10(15):4785-4798.

Sahin TT, Akbulut S, Yilmaz S. COVID-19 pandemic: Its impact on liver disease and liver transplantation. World J Gastroenterol. 2020; 26(22):2987-2999.

Delete the "Overall" column in the tables. Leave only the columns belonging to the two groups and the column where the "p" value is given in the table.

In the latest study published by Akbulut et al. (PMID: 37445501; J Clin Med. 2023 Jul 3;12(13):4466.), the factors affecting mortality in atransplant patients were seriously examined and it was stated that vaccination reduced mortality by 100 times. In the same study, immunosuppressive drugs and comorbidities were shown to be associated with mortality. It is very important to comment on this study and other large studies like it in the discussion section.

Please add a paragraph about the limitations of the study to the last part of the discussion.

Reviewer #2: The authors assessed the impact of COVID-19 vaccination on the mortality and development of severe and critical disease in LT recipients. They found that vaccination reduces the risk of severe COVID-19 in LT patients, regardless of the scheme used. I think this conclusion is well acknowledged. So this topic seems lack of novelty to the readers of Plos One Journal.

**********

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

Reviewer #1:

1. I was very happy because the topic presented in the article was from an area that I was specifically interested in.

Authors ''The risk in liver transplant (LT) patients

"has not been widely investigated," they said. This statement is unrealistic in my opinion. There are very serious studies written on this subject.

a. The paragraph was changed to acknowledge research that was recently published.

i. Background and aims: COVID-19 vaccination has proven to be effective in preventing symptomatic infection and severe disease, even in immunocompromised patients, including liver transplant patients. We aimed to assess the impact of the COVID-19 vaccination on mortality and the development of severe and critical disease in our center.

2. Please use the following studies to enrich the introduction and discussion sections of your article:

Akbulut S, Yagin FH, Sahin TT, Garzali IU, Tuncer A, Akyuz M, Bagci N, Barut B, Unsal S, Sarici KB, Saritas S, Ozer A, Bentli R, Colak C, Bayindir Y, Yilmaz S. Effect of COVID-19 Pandemic on Patients Who Have Undergone Liver Transplantation: Retrospective Cohort Study. J Clin Med. 2023;12(13):4466.

a. This article has been cited in the Discussion section (reference number 25).

i. This was also found in a study from Turkey with 387 LT recipients with confirmed COVID, and tacrolimus was found to be a protective factor against death due to COVID 19 (HR 3.44 (95% CI = 1.35–8.33)). They also found that immunosuppression with everolimus (HR 2.94 (95% CI = 1.35–6.42)) and prednisolone (2.53 fold (95% CI = 1.01–6.06)) was associated with a higher mortality; they found no effect on MMF [24].

Akbulut S, Bagci N, Akyuz M, Garzali IU, Saritas H, Tamer M, Ince V, Unsal S, Aloun A, Yilmaz S. Effect of COVID-19 Pandemic on Patients Who Have Undergone Liver Transplantation Because of Hepatocellular Carcinoma. TransplantProc. 2023;55(5):1226-1230.

a. This article has been cited in the Introduction section (reference number 8).

i. Liver transplant (LT) patients do not appear to be more prone to COVID-19 infection, with a similar incidence rate as the general population (3.18 cases/100 person-years in LT patients vs. 3.97 cases/100 person-years in non-LT patients), also featuring lower in-hospital mortality (18% vs. 27%) [5–8].

In response to the reviewer's feedback, we thoroughly examined the other references suggested for our paper. However, upon careful analysis, we concluded that these references were not pertinent or directly relevant to the content and focus of our paper. It's crucial to note that the decision was based on a comprehensive evaluation of the suggested sources in relation to the specific objectives, scope, and context of our research.

3. Delete the "Overall" column in the tables. Leave only the columns belonging to the two groups and the column where the "p" value is given in the table.

a. The overall column has been deleted from all the tables.

4. In the latest study published by Akbulut et al. (PMID: 37445501; J Clin Med. 2023 Jul 3;12(13):4466.), the factors affecting mortality in atransplant patients were seriously examined and it was stated that vaccination reduced mortality by 100 times. In the same study, immunosuppressive drugs and comorbidities were shown to be associated with mortality. It is very important to comment on this study and other large studies like it in the discussion section.

a. The following paragraph has been added to present the information demonstrated in this study.

i. In a retrospective study in Turkey, COVID-19 vaccination was associated with a 100-fold reduction in mortality in LT recipients; in this study, comorbidities such as diabetes mellitus and hypertension were not associated with higher mortality [25].

ii. This was also found in a study from Turkey with 387 LT recipients with confirmed COVID, and tacrolimus was found to be a protective factor against death due to COVID 19 (HR 3.44 (95% CI = 1.35–8.33)). They also found that immunosuppression with everolimus (HR 2.94 (95% CI = 1.35–6.42)) and prednisolone (2.53 fold (95% CI = 1.01–6.06)) was associated with a higher mortality; they found no effect on MMF [25].

5. Please add a paragraph about the limitations of the study to the last part of the discussion.

a. We acknowledge our limitations and have added a subtitle to this part of the discussion.

i. We performed a single center study with the limitations that it carries like a limited number of patients. We do not know the COVID variant that these patients were infected with or their antibody titers. We attempted to control for potential confounders; however, because of the low mortality rate, we adjusted the regression models for only two variables.

Reviewer #2:

1. The authors assessed the impact of COVID-19 vaccination on the mortality and development of severe and critical disease in LT recipients. They found that vaccination reduces the risk of severe COVID-19 in LT patients, regardless of the scheme used. I think this conclusion is well acknowledged. So this topic seems lack of novelty to the readers of Plos One Journal.

a. We appreciate the input by the reviewer; however, we think that this study is of relevance because the study shows quality data of a high-volume reference center of liver transplant in a previously.

Attachments
Attachment
Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx
Decision Letter - Fadi Aljamaan, Editor

Impact of COVID-19 vaccination on liver transplant recipients. Experience in a reference center in Mexico.

PONE-D-23-25428R1

Dear Dr. Ignacio García-Juárez,

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 will be generated when your article is formally accepted. Please note, if your institution has a publishing partnership with PLOS and your article meets the relevant criteria, all or part of your publication costs will be covered. Please make sure your user information is up-to-date by logging into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and clicking the ‘Update My Information' link at the top of the page. If you have any questions relating to publication charges, 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,

Fadi Aljamaan

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: (No Response)

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: I saw the changes made to the article. I think the article can be published in its current form.

Best regards

Reviewer #2: The authors have addressed my concerns. I don't have further questions. And I think this article could be accepted to publish in Plos one

**********

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 - Fadi Aljamaan, Editor

PONE-D-23-25428R1

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. García-Juárez,

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

At this stage, our production department will prepare your paper for publication. This includes ensuring the following:

* All references, tables, and figures are properly cited

* All relevant supporting information is included in the manuscript submission,

* There are no issues that prevent the paper from being properly typeset

If revisions are needed, the production department will contact you directly to resolve them. If no revisions are needed, you will receive an email when the publication date has been set. At this time, we do not offer pre-publication proofs to authors during production of the accepted work. Please keep in mind that we are working through a large volume of accepted articles, so please give us a few weeks to review your paper and let you know the next and final steps.

Lastly, 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 customercare@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. Fadi Aljamaan

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 .