Next Article in Journal
Point-of-Care Wound Blotting with Alcian Blue Grading versus Fluorescence Imaging for Biofilm Detection and Predicting 90-Day Healing Outcomes
Next Article in Special Issue
Long-Term Persistence of Mitochondrial DNA Instability in HIV-Exposed Uninfected Children during and after Exposure to Antiretroviral Drugs and HIV
Previous Article in Journal
A Single Oral Dose of Diclofenac Causes Transition of Experimental Subclinical Acute Kidney Injury to Chronic Kidney Disease
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Robustness of the Krebs Cycle under Physiological Conditions and in Cancer: New Clues for Evaluating Metabolism-Modifying Drug Therapies

by Rafael Franco 1,2,3,* and Joan Serrano-Marín 2
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Reviewer 3: Anonymous
Submission received: 2 May 2022 / Revised: 16 May 2022 / Accepted: 17 May 2022 / Published: 22 May 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue 10th Anniversary of Biomedicines—Mitochondrial Biology)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

My concerns are addressed. However the period in the title was not removed. I suggest to change it with colon:

Robustness of the Krebs cycle under physiological conditions and in cancer: new clues for evaluating metabolism-modifying drug therapies.

 

Author Response

Thanks for the comment and for the reminder about the ":"; we will include it in the R2 version

Reviewer 2 Report

The manuscript of “Robustness of the Krebs cycle under physiological conditions and in cancer. New clues for evaluating metabolism-modifying drug therapies” by Rafael Franco and Joan Serrano-Marín aims to study the operation of the Krebs cycle in physiological conditions and in cancer, asking whether a dynamic steady state is possible upon varying parameter values, individually or in combination. The new version of the manuscript has been substantially revised and improved. The revised manuscript may be accepted for publication after a minor revision.

Comments:

  1. The title of Section 3.3. (Line 202) should be corrected.
  2. The Conclusion section looks like highlights and can be improved. It would be better to summarize new clues for evaluating metabolism-modifying drug therapies, which were proposed in this work.

Author Response

Thanks for noticing the issue in the title of 3.3.

Also appreciated the suggestion to improve the Conclusions. We have considered such suggestion in the new version of the manuscript.

Reviewer 3 Report

I would like to thank the authors for having made significant modifications of their submitted manuscript which is now by far an improved version. However, this paper is too much "mathematical" for Biomedicines readers and does not necessarily fits the scope - I think it would be more valuable and relevant for both authors and readers to submit it to another journal belonging or not to MDPI. Thanks again for this improved version but for all these raised reasons, I cannot endorse publication of this work.

Author Response

We understand your point. The journal will decide, likley based on  the results, more than the methodology, whether the paper is suitable or not for Biomedicines and for the SI on mitochodria and disease.

 

Back to TopTop