Extracellular Matrix Expression in Human Induced Pluripotent Stem Cell-Derived Optic Vesicles

Review Data

Q: Is the topic relevant to the journal area of interest? Is it contemporary and interesting for

researchers?

A: Very good

Abstract & Keywords

Q: Are all required components included in the abstract? Are the keywords appropriately chosen?

A: Excellent

Goal

Q: Is the goal explicitly stated in the Introduction? Is its formulation clear and unambiguous?

A: Very good

Structure

Q: Is the paper's structure coherent? Is it in coherence with the goal of the paper?

A: Good

Tools and Methods

Q: Are methods the author uses adequate and well used?

A: Very good

Discussion & Conclusion

Q: Is it related to the results presented before? Do you consider them as coherent?

A: Very good

Comments:

The study is well designed and executed. The Methods and Results are adequately described. The experiments performed are really convincing and the observations are properly explained and discussed in the Discussion section. The Discussion offers a thorough and detailed analysis of the findings of the present study taking all the relevant literature into account. The figures and tables are briefly explained. The Conclusions are consistent with the evidences presented in this article and successfully identifies an array of extracellular matrix (ECM) proteins that were expressed during retinogenesis. The study is apt in recommending further characterization of selected induced pluripotent stem cell (iPSC)-derived ECM proteins, which can lead to a better understanding of retinal development and shed light on the potential application of stem cell-derived retinal organoids as a source of autologous ECM materials for retinal repair and regeneration.

Literature

Q: Does the author utilize relevant literature?

A: Good

Author's knowledge

Q: What is the level of the author’s knowledge? Does the author utilize all recent contributions relevant to the topic?

A: Very good

Length

Q: Is the length of the paper adequate to the significance of the topic? Do you suggest shortening the paper without losing its value?

A: Good

Figures & Tables

Q: Does the author use them suitably? Are legend and notations clear?

A: Very good

Writing style

Q: Is it clear and understandable?

A: Very good

Further comments on the paper

Comments: This study uses a 3D in vitro suspension culture system to direct differentiation of human induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) into optic vesicles (OVs) and examines their extracellular matrix (ECM) composition during early events of retinogenesis. It applies a well-established retinal differentiation protocol to direct differentiation of iPSCs into OVs with some modifications. The study holds significance as there is little information about the dynamics of ECM formation during retinal development in the literature. The study successfully demonstrates that iPSC-derived OVs expresses several CAMs/ECMs that have previously been shown to play key roles in retinogenesis in vivo, specifically NCAM1, NPRAP, Tenascin C, CD44, Fibronectin I, and Vitronectin.

Q: Would you recommend this manuscript for further publication?

A: Yes - Suitable to be published

If you have any questions and clarifications you can write to the journal.

Thanks,
Science Repository Team