Peer Review History

Original SubmissionJuly 9, 2024
Decision Letter - Sadiq Umar, Editor

PONE-D-24-28155The CorrelationBetween Cellular O-GlcNAcylation and Sensitivity to O-GlcNAc Inhibitor in Colorectal Cancer CellsPLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Charoensuksai,

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 Sep 29 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,

Sadiq Umar

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

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

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. Thank you for stating in your Funding Statement: 

This report is the product of the research project "The effect of OGT inhibitor in the four molecular subclasses of colorectal cancer," financially supported by the Research Grant for New Scholar (RGNS) from the Office of the Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Higher Education, Science, Research, and Innovation, Fiscal Year 2563BE [Grant number RGNS 63-225]. 

Please provide an amended statement that declares all the funding or sources of support (whether external or internal to your organization) received during this study, as detailed online in our guide for authors at http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submit-now.  Please also include the statement “There was no additional external funding received for this study.” in your updated Funding Statement. 

Please include your amended Funding Statement within your cover letter. We will change the online submission form on your behalf.

3. Thank you for stating the following in the Acknowledgments Section of your manuscript: 

This report is the product of the research project "The effect of OGT inhibitor in the four molecular subclasses of colorectal cancer," financially supported by the Research Grant for New Scholar (RGNS) from the Office of the Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Higher Education, Science, Research, and Innovation, Fiscal Year 2563BE [Grant number RGNS 63-225]. 

We note that you have provided funding information that is not currently declared in your Funding Statement. However, funding information should not appear in the Acknowledgments section or other areas of your manuscript. We will only publish funding information present in the Funding Statement section of the online submission form. 

Please remove any funding-related text from the manuscript and let us know how you would like to update your Funding Statement. Currently, your Funding Statement reads as follows: 

This report is the product of the research project "The effect of OGT inhibitor in the four molecular subclasses of colorectal cancer," financially supported by the Research Grant for New Scholar (RGNS) from the Office of the Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Higher Education, Science, Research, and Innovation, Fiscal Year 2563BE [Grant number RGNS 63-225]. 

Please include your amended statements within your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf.

4. Please include captions for your Supporting Information files at the end of your manuscript, and update any in-text citations to match accordingly. Please see our Supporting Information guidelines for more information: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/supporting-information

5. PLOS ONE now requires that authors provide the original uncropped and unadjusted images underlying all blot or gel results reported in a submission’s figures or Supporting Information files. This policy and the journal’s other requirements for blot/gel reporting and figure preparation are described in detail at https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/figures#loc-blot-and-gel-reporting-requirements and https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/figures#loc-preparing-figures-from-image-files. When you submit your revised manuscript, please ensure that your figures adhere fully to these guidelines and provide the original underlying images for all blot or gel data reported in your submission. See the following link for instructions on providing the original image data: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/figures#loc-original-images-for-blots-and-gels.   

In your cover letter, please note whether your blot/gel image data are in Supporting Information or posted at a public data repository, provide the repository URL if relevant, and provide specific details as to which raw blot/gel images, if any, are not available. Email us at plosone@plos.org if you have any question.

[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: 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: Charoensuksai et al, studied the relation O-GlcNAcylation with colorectal cancer. They measured O-GlcNAcylation, OGA and OGT levels levels in colorectal cancer cell lines and their sensitivity to OGT inhibitor OSML1. They found a dose dependent decline in cell viability in cancer cell lines and Os exhibited a synergistic relationship with regorafenib (Re). They concluded that OSML1 can be a potent anticancer agent when used along with other treatments. It is a well thought study, but the data supporting the claims especially the western blots are low quality. The authors should use proper controls to check the specificity of antibodies especially when measuring O-GlcNAc. Stressing Cells to enhance O-GlcNAcylation can be a good control. I would suggest using Lectins as well for secondary confirmation. Inclusion of one more control line is highly recommended.

Reviewer #2: The manuscript suggests a novel predictive marker, O-GlcNAc transferase inhibitor (OGTi), for O-GlcNAcylation in various cancer cell lines, particularly colorectal cell lines. The manuscript is acceptable after addressing minor grammatical errors and the following comments.

Comments and Suggestions

Background on Regorafenib (Re): The authors should provide a brief background on regorafenib, explaining why it was chosen for the study. Additionally, they should clarify its FDA approval status.

Error Bars and Statistical Analysis: In Figure 2 C, D, and E, the western blot quantification lacks error bars for the intensity of O-GlcNAc, OGA, and OGT in all cell lines. Given that the experiments were performed in triplicate, the authors should calculate the data from all three results, include error bars, and conduct statistical analysis.

Grammatical Error: In paragraph 3.2, "our results evealed..." should be corrected to "our results revealed...".

Flow Cytometry Data: While Figure 6 demonstrates the cytotoxic activity of the combination of Os:Re in NCI-H508 cells, suggesting the efficacy of dual therapy, flow cytometry data is missing for FHC cells (control cells). Including similar flow cytometry experiments for FHC cells would provide valuable insights into the specificity of the treatment.

**********

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: Yes: Willayat Yousuf Wani

Reviewer #2: Yes: Mohd Tayyab

**********

[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's comment:

Charoensuksai et al, studied the relation O-GlcNAcylation with colorectal cancer. They measured O-GlcNAcylation, OGA and OGT levels levels in colorectal cancer cell lines and their sensitivity to OGT inhibitor OSML1. They found a dose dependent decline in cell viability in cancer cell lines and Os exhibited a synergistic relationship with regorafenib (Re). They concluded that OSML1 can be a potent anticancer agent when used along with other treatments. It is a well thought study, but the data supporting the claims especially the western blots are low quality. The authors should use proper controls to check the specificity of antibodies especially when measuring O-GlcNAc. Stressing Cells to enhance O-GlcNAcylation can be a good control. I would suggest using Lectins as well for secondary confirmation. Inclusion of one more control line is highly recommended.

Response:

We appreciate the reviewer’s suggestion and have added three additional tests, previously reported by other research groups, to verify antibody specificity to O-GlcNAc moieties: (1) stressing cells with DTT to increase O-GlcNAcylation, (2) adding free GlcNAc to the blocking solutions during the blocking and antibody incubation process (GlcNAc blocking), and (3) performing on-blot β-elimination to remove O-glycan under basic conditions.

The results, presented in the new S2 Fig, confirm the specific detection of O-GlcNAc modifications on proteins and are described in the revised manuscript on page 11-12, lines 264-271. The sources of materials, including GlcNAc and DTT, have been added to the “Chemicals and Reagents” section on page 5, lines 101-102. The detailed procedure is outlined in section “2.6. Verification of antibody specificity for O-GlcNAc moieties” on page 8, lines 170-187.

References to the employed protocols include:

25. Reeves RA, Lee A, Henry R, Zachara NE. Characterization of the specificity of O-GlcNAc reactive antibodies under conditions of starvation and stress. Anal Biochem. 2014;457:8-18. doi: 10.1016/j.ab.2014.04.008.

26. Verathamjamras C, Sriwitool TE, Netsirisawan P, Chaiyawat P, Chokchaichamnankit D, Prasongsook N, et al. Aberrant RL2 O-GlcNAc antibody reactivity against serum-IgA1 of patients with colorectal cancer. Glycoconj J. 2021;38(1):55-65. doi: 10.1007/s10719-021-09978-8.

Reviewer 2's comments:

1. Background on Regorafenib (Re): The authors should provide a brief background on regorafenib, explaining why it was chosen for the study. Additionally, they should clarify its FDA approval status.

Response:

The background of regorafenib, including its clinical approval status, was added in the introduction section page 3 line 56 - 70 as per the reviewer’s suggestion.

2. Error Bars and Statistical Analysis: In Figure 2 C, D, and E, the western blot quantification lacks error bars for the intensity of O-GlcNAc, OGA, and OGT in all cell lines. Given that the experiments were performed in triplicate, the authors should calculate the data from all three results, include error bars, and conduct statistical analysis.

Response:

We appreciate the reviewer’s comment and have responded by performing western blotting in triplicate. Data from all three replicates were analyzed, and the graphs have been adjusted to include error bars. Statistical analysis was also conducted, as recommended. Fig 2 and 3 have been revised accordingly, and a new S1 Fig has been added to display the western blot signals for O-GlcNAc, OGT, and OGA from the three replicates. The information related to western blot under “Materials and methods” and “Results” sections have been updated to reflect these changes.

3. Grammatical Error: In paragraph 3.2, "our results evealed..." should be corrected to "our results revealed...".

Response:

Corrected as per the reviewer’s suggestion.

4. Flow Cytometry Data: While Figure 6 demonstrates the cytotoxic activity of the combination of Os:Re in NCI-H508 cells, suggesting the efficacy of dual therapy, flow cytometry data is missing for FHC cells (control cells). Including similar flow cytometry experiments for FHC cells would provide valuable insights into the specificity of the treatment.

Response:

We appreciate the reviewer’s suggestion and have conducted flow cytometry analysis on FHC cells. However, due to their non-cancerous nature, FHC cells grow significantly slower than cancerous cell lines, which presented a challenge in expanding them to yield sufficient quantities for flow cytometry at all concentration intervals and combinations, as we did with NCI-H508 cells. Therefore, we selected the most extreme condition, the Os:Re 20:2 combination, for flow cytometry analysis of FHC cells compared to the vehicle control. The results, shown in the new S3 Fig, revealed limited changes in the total apoptotic and dead cells, which aligned with the MTT assay cell viability data (Fig. 5A). This new finding is now described on page 17, lines 368-372, and the experimental procedure has been updated to include this experiment on page 9, lines 202-203.

Attachments
Attachment
Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx
Decision Letter - Sadiq Umar, Editor

The Correlation Between Cellular O-GlcNAcylation and Sensitivity to O-GlcNAc Inhibitor in Colorectal Cancer Cells

PONE-D-24-28155R1

Dear Dr. Charoensukai,

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 Editorial Manager® 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,

Sadiq Umar

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Formally Accepted
Acceptance Letter - Sadiq Umar, Editor

PONE-D-24-28155R1

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Charoensuksai,

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. Sadiq Umar

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 .