Peer Review History
| Original SubmissionDecember 24, 2024 |
|---|
|
PONE-D-24-58885The antiangiogenic peptide VIAN-c4551 inhibits lung melanoma metastasis in mice by reducing pulmonary vascular permeabilityPLOS ONE Dear Dr. Clapp, 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 Mar 17 2025 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:
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, Mohamed Abdelkarim 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 2. Thank you for stating the following financial disclosure: “This work was supported by the Dirección General de Asuntos del Personal Académico (DGAPA) Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México (UNAM) (Grant IN202424) to CC. Alma Lorena Perez is a doctoral student from the ‘Programa de Doctorado en Ciencias Biomédicas, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México (UNAM)’ and has received fellowship 788879 from Consejo Nacional de Humanidades, Ciencia y Tecnología (CONAHCYT). MZ, EA-C and JPR are postdoctoral fellows from CONAHCYT.” Please state what role the funders took in the study. If the funders had no role, please state: "The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript." If this statement is not correct you must amend it as needed. Please include this amended Role of Funder statement in your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf. 3. We note that you have a patent relating to material pertinent to this article. Please provide an amended statement of Competing Interests to declare this patent (with details including name and number), along with any other relevant declarations relating to employment, consultancy, patents, products in development or modified products etc. Please confirm that this does not alter your adherence to all PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials, as detailed online in our guide for authors http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/competing-interests by including the following statement: "This does not alter our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials.” If there are restrictions on sharing of data and/or materials, please state these. Please note that we cannot proceed with consideration of your article until this information has been declared. This information should be included in your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf. 4. When completing the data availability statement of the submission form, you indicated that you will make your data available on acceptance. We strongly recommend all authors decide on a data sharing plan before acceptance, as the process can be lengthy and hold up publication timelines. Please note that, though access restrictions are acceptable now, your entire data will need to be made freely accessible if your manuscript is accepted for publication. This policy applies to all data except where public deposition would breach compliance with the protocol approved by your research ethics board. If you are unable to adhere to our open data policy, please kindly revise your statement to explain your reasoning and we will seek the editor's input on an exemption. Please be assured that, once you have provided your new statement, the assessment of your exemption will not hold up the peer review process. 5. 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: I Don't Know ********** 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: In this manuscript by Perez et al, the authors investigated the function of VIAN-c4551, a peptide analogue of vasoinhibin, in extravasation and lung metastasis of melanoma cells. They discovered that VIAN-c4551 inhibits B16-F10 cell-induced increase in vascular permeability and metastasis in vivo, as well as endothelial monolayer permeability in vitro. This is a well-designed study. However, there are a number of concerns that need to be addressed before this manuscript is in a publishable fashion. Specific comments are as follows: 1) In the Evans blue assay, the quantified data were shown as the dye concentration in the extracts (as described in the Methods). The unit is ul/ g lung x h. What the "ul" represents needs to be defined. 2) Is there a particular reason that female animals were used in this study? 3) Although TEER and transendothelial migration assays are established methods. It is advised to put in more details on for example, how to define BUVEC-E6E7 monolayers. 4) Do non-metastatic cancer cells (and their conditioned medium) affect TEER as there is no control for this part? 5) In the discussion, in Line 336, the authors stated that VIAN-c4551 inhibits the increase in vascular permeability induced by VEGF by blocking production of NO by eNOS. Is it shown in ref. 19? Please rephrase if it is not a published result. 6) The results show that VIAN-c4551 blocks metastatic cell-induced increase in vascular permeability, presumably through suppressing VEGF action without affecting VEGF expression. So how does this work? As this manuscript does not have data for mechanistic investigation, the authors should at least discuss potential molecular mechanisms such as putative receptors, signaling pathways, distinct features from vasoinhibin etc. 7) Minor: a number of typos: line 90 - SFB; line 158 - lung paraffin sections from lungs Reviewer #2: The study titled “The antiangiogenic peptide VIAN-c4551 inhibits lung melanoma metastasis in mice by reducing pulmonary vascular permeability” demonstrates that VIAN-c4551 effectively inhibits lung melanoma metastasis in mice by reducing pulmonary vascular permeability and preventing melanoma cell extravasation. The findings are well-supported by both in vivo and in vitro experiments, and the study opens new avenues for the development of anti-metastatic therapies. However, further research is needed to validate these findings in human clinical trials and to explore the full range of mechanisms by which VIAN-c4551 exerts its anti-metastatic effects. To further evaluate the study’s findings and address potential limitations, the following questions could be posed to the authors: Dose Selection and Optimization: - Why was a single dose of VIAN-c4551 (1 mg/kg) chosen for the experiments? Have you conducted dose-response studies to determine the optimal therapeutic dose? - Have you explored the pharmacokinetics of VIAN-c4551, such as its half-life, bioavailability, or potential accumulation in tissues, which could influence its efficacy and safety? Toxicity and Safety: - Did you evaluate the potential toxicity of VIAN-c4551 in mice, particularly with long-term administration? Were there any signs of systemic toxicity, such as organ damage or immune suppression? - Why did you not assess other serum markers (e.g., liver enzymes, kidney function) to evaluate the systemic impact of VIAN-c4551 treatment? In Vitro Model Selection: - Why did you choose bovine umbilical vein endothelial cells (BUVEC-E6E7) for the in vitro experiments? Did you consider using human endothelial cell lines to better reflect human physiology? - Why did you focus on venous endothelial cells rather than arterial endothelial cells, which might be more relevant to the pulmonary vasculature and metastatic seeding? ********** 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 |
|
The antiangiogenic peptide VIAN-c4551 inhibits lung melanoma metastasis in mice by reducing pulmonary vascular permeability PONE-D-24-58885R1 Dear Dr. Clapp, 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, Mohamed Abdelkarim Academic Editor PLOS ONE Additional Editor Comments (optional): Reviewers' comments: |
| Formally Accepted |
|
PONE-D-24-58885R1 PLOS ONE Dear Dr. Clapp, 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 You will receive further instructions from the production team, including instructions on how to review your proof when it is ready. Please keep in mind that we are working through a large volume of accepted articles, so please give us a few days 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. Mohamed Abdelkarim 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 .