| 查看: 1463 | 回复: 4 | ||
sunlei8753木虫 (小有名气)
|
[求助]
这样审稿意见要不要argue？ 已有2人参与
|
|
Reviewers' comments: Reviewer #1: In this work, the authors presented an idea by using pH sensitive mesoporous silica nanoparticles for selective delivery of doxorubicin into cancerous cells. They provided a set of characterization data for functionalized mesoporous silica nanoparticles and showed some in-vitro studies. The loading capacity and encapsulation efficiency at different pH and the use of the Ridger-Peppas model are something interesting in this work. The manuscript can be considered for publication after addressing the following concerns. 1. The authors should improve the language. They used some sentences, like "what is more", are rather informal. In scheme 1 part (B), the NH3H2O should be changed appropriately with right subscript. In the section "2.5 Encapsulation efficiency (EE) and loading capacity (LC) of anti-cancer drug doxorubicin (DOX)", the equation of "AE%" should be changed to "EE%". 2. The part where the fluorescence of doxorubicin was measured "dox solution was determined by using a fluorescence spectrophotometer at 485 nm" and in another part "free DOX was determined by using a fluorescence spectrophotometer at 485 nm and a calibration": the wavelength of 485 nm refers to the excitation or emission of doxorubicin? If it refers to the excitation of doxorubicin, it should be mentioned as "using an excitation of 485 nm". 3. In section "2.7 Analysis of in vitro release", dox release mechanism was determined by the amount of insulin released versus time using a mathematical model. Then, in the results and discussion section Table 2, they did not mention the use of any mathematical model for section 2.7. Thus, the detailed information for mathematical model and Ridger-Peppas model should be provided. 4. Confocal images should be obtained to further support the in-vitro cell experiments. Reviewer #3: The manuscript is about the preparation and application of pH-responsive mesoporous silica nanoparticles (MSN) as drug-release system. The authors characterized their product in detail, and the drug-loading/release and in vitro cell experiment also had been done. In my opinion, the manuscript could be accepted in the journal after minor revision. Specific comments: 1. About the MSN pore size, here the size was 6.7 nm and generally 3 nm was obtained when CTAB was used as the template. Why? 2. For the particle characterization, the DLS size should be given to define the particle size and stability. In the other hand, the surface charge is important for the system, thus the zeta potential of the particle should be measured. 3. For the hydrolysis of the boroester bond between CS-LA and APBA-MSN, the authors should give some evidence. 4. About the pH-responsive MSN based on polymers, some progress have been reported, such as J. Mater. Chem., 2011, 21, 9239; Inter. J. Pharm., 2011, 421, 388; Inter. J. Pharm., 2013, 450, 296; Eur. J. Pharm. Biopharm., 2013, 84, 91. The authors should cite them to make the manuscript more comprehensive. 编辑 Dear Prof. The reports to your manuscript are enclosed below. The reviewers raised many major concerns regarding the novelty of the work, the experimental study and data quality and analysis, and commented about lacking citations and proper languish. Unfortunately, such reports do not allow publication in our journal. We hope you will find the reviews useful for advancing of the work towards future submission. 要不要argue？ |
回复此楼» 猜你喜欢
让我中一个面上吧！
已经有13人回复
-
看来今天不会放榜了？
已经有6人回复
-
人气不行了
已经有7人回复
-
今日不放榜？网传国自然预计 8 月 27 日可查结果
已经有18人回复
-
感觉是下周放榜了
已经有12人回复
-
我面上完蛋了
已经有8人回复
-
只有每年这种时候来逛逛小木虫
已经有25人回复
-
什么时候开奖？
已经有7人回复
-
时间戳又变了
已经有18人回复
-
时间戳又变了8-15
已经有27人回复
» 本主题相关价值贴推荐，对您同样有帮助:
- SCI审稿意见，一个大修，一个小修后接收。 还有戏没？
已经有12人回复
- 迷惑了，审稿人这样一个意见
已经有6人回复
- 审稿国人的文章，真是服了某些人了。
已经有76人回复
- 请问审稿意见如何回复
已经有14人回复
- 文章的审稿意见回来了，觉得审稿人意见有问题，想写argue，请教怎么写argue
已经有9人回复
- 这样的审稿意见如何回复
已经有5人回复
- 悲催的审稿意见，我该怎么办
已经有12人回复
- 这样的审稿意见可以申诉吗？
已经有20人回复
- 一个审稿人强烈不认可，为啥编辑又送审个审稿人？
已经有22人回复
- 这样的专家审稿意见该如何回答？
已经有5人回复
- 回复审稿人的意见时，要不要把改动的地方都写出来
已经有7人回复
- 审稿人没提具体问题，改如何回复？
已经有22人回复
- 由于编辑发错了审稿意见，编辑拒稿，怎么办？
已经有41人回复
- JOSA B这样的状态和审稿意见，有戏吗？第一次搞SCI，心里没底啊！
已经有113人回复
- 【已解决】急问啊，国际会议一个审稿意见接受一个审稿意见拒绝、
已经有9人回复
- 收到JACS审稿意见， 据稿要申诉么？？？
已经有58人回复
- 一个月前投的PTL，这样的审稿意见中的机会大么？
已经有31人回复
- [求助]如何处理这样的审稿意见：The study is descriptive in nature
已经有12人回复
- 稿件被拒，想和编辑argue 具体怎么写，有没有模板？
已经有4人回复
- PRB这样的审稿意见算是大修还是小修？
已经有6人回复
- 这样的审稿意见退休后直接接受的可能性大不？
已经有11人回复
- SCI投稿审稿人意见是这样的怎么回复？
已经有9人回复
- 如何拒绝审稿？
已经有14人回复
- 请问如何与编辑Argue?
已经有12人回复
- 话说上次拒绝了某审稿人的意见
已经有24人回复
yuanduhu0602
金虫 (著名写手)
- 应助: 10 (幼儿园)
- 金币: 7276.6
- 散金: 3
- 红花: 2
- 帖子: 1013
- 在线: 614小时
- 虫号: 276138
- 注册: 2006-09-02
- 性别: GG
- 专业: 功能与智能高分子
2楼2014-03-01 06:18:36
sunlei8753
木虫 (小有名气)
- 应助: 0 (幼儿园)
- 金币: 5144.5
- 散金: 10
- 红花: 2
- 帖子: 189
- 在线: 468.5小时
- 虫号: 622789
- 注册: 2008-10-11
- 性别: GG
- 专业: 功能与智能高分子
3楼2014-03-01 11:25:22
4楼2014-03-01 18:30:29
ghost820521
铁杆木虫 (著名写手)
- 应助: 19 (小学生)
- 金币: 12233.2
- 散金: 4300
- 红花: 7
- 帖子: 1294
- 在线: 258.9小时
- 虫号: 88950
- 注册: 2005-08-26
- 性别: GG
- 专业: 基础物理学
5楼2014-03-01 20:50:30
