Peer Review History

Original SubmissionMay 11, 2024
Decision Letter - Gianpaolo Papaccio, Editor

PONE-D-24-19048Development of an in vivo syngeneic mouse transplant model of invasive intestinal adenocarcinoma driven by endogenous expression of Pik3caH1047R and Apc lossPLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Phillips,

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.

This is an interesting manuscript well performed and that opens insights on the possible use in cancer therapies. The Authors must highlight this aspect and add some info about human more recent studies on organoids and more recent use in therapies as specified to them by a reviewer and by myself in our reports.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Jul 12 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,

Gianpaolo Papaccio, M.D., 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 noticed you have some minor occurrence of overlapping text with the following previous publication(s), which needs to be addressed:

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00384-018-3202-8?

https://www.pure.ed.ac.uk/ws/files/20002553/Mouse_models_of_colorectal_cancer_as_preclinical_models.pdf?

In your revision ensure you cite all your sources (including your own works), and quote or rephrase any duplicated text outside the methods section. Further consideration is dependent on these concerns being addressed.

3. 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.

4. Thank you for stating the following in the Competing Interests section: 

"I have read the journal's policy and the authors of this manuscript have the following competing interests: 

Wayne A. Phillips is a member of the editorial board of PLOS ONE. The authors have declared that no other competing interests exist."

Please confirm that this does not alter your adherence to all PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials, by including the following statement: "This does not alter our adherence to  PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials.” (as detailed online in our guide for authors http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/competing-interests). 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. 

Please include your updated Competing Interests statement in your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf.

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 questions.

6. 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.

Additional Editor Comments:

In this study, the Authors obtained an immunocompetent, transplantable model of colorectal cancer, that can be suitable for in vivo studies of immune-based therapies.

Albeit its interest, it must then evaluate the relationships with TME.

Taking into consideration that it is a murine model and not a human one, the Authors must add and focus in the human cancer field in order to give more interest to this study, adding several info on organoids and human colorectal cancer as well as proteo trascriptomics and TME ( J Exp Clin Cancer Res. 2023 Jan 6;42(1):8. doi: 10.1186/s13046-022-02591-z; doi: 10.3390/cancers12123611; ESMO Open Volume 5, Issue 523 September 2020 Article number e000847;International Journal of Molecular Sciences Volume 24, Issue 23December 2023 Article number 17101 etc).

[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

**********

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

Reviewer #1: 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

**********

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

**********

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, the Authors generated an immunocompetent, transplantable model of colorectal cancer suitable for in vivo assessment of immune-based therapeutic approaches. The manuscript is interesting, and it is a starting point to develop a model by which it is possible to evaluate relationship among different cell types homing in the tumour microenvironment. Albeit this, the authors must better focus on how they want to exploit this model in human cancer field. Moreover, they must add information regarding the possibility to use other models as organoids for drug screening (citing the studies as J Exp Clin Cancer Res. 2023 Jan 6;42(1):8. doi: 10.1186/s13046-022-02591-z; doi: 10.3390/cancers12123611.) and tumour microenvironment evaluation.

**********

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

**********

[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

Response to reviewer and editor comments

We thank the reviewer and editor for their positive comments and suggestions.

As suggested by the reviewer, we have added some comments to the discussion to better highlight the relevance to human cancer and how we feel our model could be exploited in future studies (lines 315-332 in tracked version).

Regarding evaluating the relationships with TME, we agree that this is a particularly interesting question which our model will be very useful for addressing, and we have now added some comments to this effect in the discussion (lines 326-332 in tracked version). However, we do feel that such studies are beyond the scope of our current manuscript which simply aims to report our model.

Indeed, we would like to stress this manuscript is intended to simply report the development of a novel syngeneic mouse model of a PIK3CA-driven colorectal cancer. We have not sought to address any specific biological or clinical question in this manuscript. Nevertheless, we believe this model will be a valuable adjunct to current models and we feel it important to report this model to the wider research community in a timely fashion.

We note that the reviewer and editor request that we cite several specific papers. We have read these articles with interest.

Papaccio et al. (2023) J Exp Clin Cancer Res. 42(1):8. This paper describes the generation of a large number of patient-derived organoid models that they use for a proteotranscriptomic study to explore the mechanisms underlying drug response. Although they use human organoids, and an in vitro cell culture system, we agree that it is an excellent example of how our model could be exploited and have now included reference to this paper in our discussion (reference 22, line 326 of tracked change version).

Papaccio et al. (2020) Cancers. 12: 3611. This is a review article that discusses two potentially practice-changing clinical trials and how they may affect our understanding of treating locally advanced rectal cancers. An interesting and informative article but unclear how it specifically relates to our current manuscript.

Tarazona et al. (2020) ESMO Open. 5: e000847. A clinical study of ctDNA and CDX2 expression as markers of recurrence in patients with localised colon cancer but of unclear relevance to our manuscript.

Papavassiliou et al. (2023) Int J Mol Sci. 24; 17101. An editorial article discussing the targeting the TGF-β signalling axis in metastatic colorectal cancer. Again, the specific relevance to our current manuscript is unclear to us.

While we agree that these are important and noteworthy articles, and may arguably be tangentially related to our manuscript, given our model is of colorectal cancer, we would contend that they address topics that are largely outside the scope of our current manuscript. If citing these articles is essential for acceptance, we would respectfully request some further guidance as to what is specifically required and clarification as to why these particular articles should be cited.

Attachments
Attachment
Submitted filename: Response to reviewers.docx
Decision Letter - Gianpaolo Papaccio, Editor

Development of an in vivo syngeneic mouse transplant model of invasive intestinal adenocarcinoma driven by endogenous expression of Pik3caH1047R and Apc loss

PONE-D-24-19048R1

Dear Dr. Phillips,

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,

Gianpaolo Papaccio, M.D., Ph.D.

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

The Authors made the minor amendments as requested

Reviewers' comments:

Formally Accepted
Acceptance Letter - Gianpaolo Papaccio, Editor

PONE-D-24-19048R1

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Phillips,

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

Prof. Gianpaolo Papaccio

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 .