All reviews of published articles are made public. This includes manuscript files, peer review comments, author rebuttals and revised materials. Note: This was optional for articles submitted before 13 February 2023.
Peer reviewers are encouraged (but not required) to provide their names to the authors when submitting their peer review. If they agree to provide their name, then their personal profile page will reflect a public acknowledgment that they performed a review (even if the article is rejected). If the article is accepted, then reviewers who provided their name will be associated with the article itself.
The authors have addressed the questions from reviewers.
[# PeerJ Staff Note - this decision was reviewed and approved by Vladimir Uversky, a PeerJ Section Editor covering this Section #]
no comment
no comment
no comment
The authors have addressed all the comments.
no comment
no comment
no comment
The authors provided satisfactory responses to all the questions and addressed the concerns effectively. I recommend accepting the manuscript.
Please carefully read the comments and suggestions and provide your point-by-point responses and revisions.
[# PeerJ Staff Note: The review process has identified that the English language should be improved. PeerJ can provide language editing services - please contact us at copyediting@peerj.com for pricing (be sure to provide your manuscript number and title) #]
[# PeerJ Staff Note: Please ensure that all review comments are addressed in a rebuttal letter and any edits or clarifications mentioned in the letter are also inserted into the revised manuscript where appropriate. It is a common mistake to address reviewer questions in the rebuttal letter but not in the revised manuscript. If a reviewer raised a question then your readers will probably have the same question so you should ensure that the manuscript can stand alone without the rebuttal letter. Directions on how to prepare a rebuttal letter can be found at: https://peerj.com/benefits/academic-rebuttal-letters/ #]
no comment'
no comment'
no comment'
The article elucidated that arsenic trioxide inhibits the proliferation and invasion of human colorectal cancer cells by upregulating TRPM4. However, there are several comments to be addressed.
1. The layout of Fig1 and Fig2 in the article is inappropriate. Fig1 describes the role of ATO in inhibiting colorectal cancer, and Fig2 shows that ATO inhibits tumors by upregulating the expression of TRPM4. Therefore，Fig1 should contain data on ATO inhibiting tumors, and Fig1B-C should be merged with Fig2.
2. There are some case formatting errors in the manuscript, such as "Our" should be "our" in the abstract.
3. The first appearance of the abbreviated name in the text should have a full name. For example, the "Bax" in the introduction should be marked with its full name.
4. In Fig2, the representative graph of TRPM4 does not match the statistical graph. It is recommended to reselect the protein representative graph.
5. The ordinate of the statistical graph of the TUNEL experiment in Fig4A is inappropriate and can be changed to "Positive rate of apoptotic cells（%）".
no comment
no comment
no comment
In this study, the authors investigated ATO inhibited CRC cell growth by inducing TRPM4 expression, and TRPM4 might be a novel target for the treatment of CRC. The study is well-structured, with a clear experimental design, including the chosen concentration of ATO, and the analytical methods. However, the HCT116 cells as a CRC cell model has limitations.
Dear author:
Your manuscript elucidated that ATO suppressed the growth of HCT116 cells in a dose-dependent manner and blocking TRPM4 reversed the effects of ATO on HCT116 cells growth. However, there are several points that could be improved:
1. The manuscript contains many basic language and Formatting mistakes, such as the punctuation mark in the first sentence of the conclusion of the abstract being ".". The tense of the main clause and subordinate clause is inconsistent. Please unify whether "P" is in italics.
2. Some parts of the article mention previous articles, but there are no annotated citations. Please add citation annotations.
3. Please indicate the test method of data processing in the result chart note.
4. What role does TRPM4 play in other malignancies, and is it consistent with that in colorectal cancer?
5. "HCT116 cells" appears many times in the text, but there is still "HCT116 cell", please write in the same way.
All text and materials provided via this peer-review history page are made available under a Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.