manuscript?'s type is more fitting to be a ?Clinical Study? than a ?Research Article.?
According to our definition, the \Clinical Study presents the methodology and results of study that was performed within a clinical setting. These studies include both controlled clinical trials as well as retrospective analyses of a body of existing cases. If a Clinical Study is presenting the results of a controlled trial, it is necessary for that trial to be registered in a publicly available registry. In all cases, Clinical Studies should include a description of the patient group that was involved, along with a thorough explanation of the methodology used in the study and the results that were obtained. Clinical Studies should adhere to all ethical guidelines that are required by the jurisdiction in which the study was conducted.\
Accordingly, I would appreciate if you let me know your feedback concerning this issue.I think what you need to do is the following: 1. Read carefully the scope of JBB:
Journal of Biomedicine and Biotechnology is a peer-reviewed, open access journal that publishes original research articles as well as review articles in several areas of life sciences. The subject areas covered by the journal are: Agricultural Biotechnology Animal Biotechnology Biochemistry Bioinformatics Biophysics Cell Biology Genetics Genomics Immunology
Microbial Biotechnology Microbiology
Molecular Biology Oncology Pharmacology Plant Biotechnology Toxicology Virology
2. Check if your research content fits any of above.
3. If yes, read carefully the letter of Hend Rostom, and the definitions included. If you believe your study is NOT a clinical study, then explain why. 4. In clinical trials, especially phase II studies, there are PK, PD, or biomarker sub-studies. Theses sub-studies may be submitted to basic journals, like JBB.
By the way, Hend Rostom is only an Editorial Staff member. His duty may be to initially triage (categorize) all submitted articles. So, he may be not sure of the type of your article.Reading them, enjoying them.已PM回复。
这期半月谈专题与北溟小鱼战友共同主讲
15 March 2009 （第五讲）给审稿人的回复信
论文题目
：Systematic analysis of microRNA involved in resistance of gastric cancer cell to the chemotherapeutic drug 所投杂志 ：cancer letter 投稿结果 ：major revision 审稿人内容 （有删节）：
2. In Figure 4B, the authors showed growth inhibition in response to treatment with a MAPK inhibitor in SGC7901/VCR cells. What is the effect of the MAPK inhibitor on cell growth in parental SGC7901 cells? The authors should add this exp
eriment in Figure 4B.
Moreover, if the authors say that microRNAs and the MAPK pathway are involved in resistance to chemotherapy, the effect of the MAPK inhibitor on expression of microRNAs (miR-34a, miR-148a, miR-21, let-7i, etc.) and their targets (E2F3, PXP, K-RAS, PTEN, etc.) should be analyzed in SGC7901/VCR cells. 作者原答：
As suggested, we have detected the effect of the MAPK inhibitor on cell growth in parental SGC7901 cells and the results have been added in our manuscript. As for the relationship between the microRNAs, MAPK pathway and the drug resistance, our results showed a group of microRNAs may be involved in drug resistance and pathway mapping of their targets gene indicated that MAPK pathway was related to the drug resistance. The precise effect of the MAPK inhibitor on expression of microRNAs and their targets was under investigation. 建议改答：
We thank the reviewer ’s valuable suggestion （谢谢之类的词必要时一定要用。但要避免滥用，如每段或每个回复点都用）and conducted an additional experiment （强调补实验，因为下面要求的实验不打算补）on the effect of the MAPK inhibitor on cell growth in parental SGC7901 cells and the results have been added in the revised manuscript.
In the present study, XXXX （what results? 与 下面的“pathway mapping of their targets gene”对应。）suggest that a group of microRNAs may be involved in the drug resistance and the pathway mapping of their targets gene indicates that the MAPK pathway is also involved in the drug resistance. Thus, we said that “microRNAs and the MAPK pathway are involved in resistance to chemotherapy” in the previous version. We understand the reviewer’s point, and agree with the reviewer that the effect of the MAPK inhibitor on expression of microRNAs should be analyzed in SGC7901/VCR cells to determine whether they are dependently or separately involved in the resistance to chemotherapy. We believe that the regulatory relationship between microRNAs and the MAPK pathway in resistance to chemotherapy is a very important topic. Thus, we would like to carry out a separate but more extensive experiment on this topic (如果说under investigation, 也许审
稿人会要求提供初步结果。但换一种说法，即作者同意审稿人的意见，并认为需做独立的、更深入的研究。这样可能避免补实验。的确，作者认为所要求补的实验有点脱离该论文的主题，但这点不便跟审稿人argue）. Accordingly, we have modified the sentence to address the reviewer’s point（实验不打算补了，但对审稿人的意见不能无动于衷）. However, if the reviewer feels that it is essential to add this result in this manuscript, we would be willing to carry out the additional experiments（有些审稿人很固执，所以要给他、给自己留有余地）. 加注：
北溟小鱼给我咨询如何回答审稿人这个意见时我的答复如下：
首先我们来分析为什么审稿人会提出这个问题。从审稿人提出的“if the authors say that microRNAs and the MAPK pathway are involved in resistance to chemotherapy”，我判断很可能你在讨论中指出“microRNAs and the MAPK pathway are involved in resistance to chemotherapy”。但审稿人认为，你的实验结果不足以支持上述论断，因而提出这一问题。
然后我们来讨论如何回答这一问题。我认为回答和解决这个问题有两种方法：
1.如果作者坚信“microRNAs and the MAPK pathway are involved in resistance to chemotherapy”，那么就需按审稿人的建议补试验。除了时间、精力和金钱外，还要面临试验结果与预期结果不符的风险。同时正如作者所言，“感觉再做这个实验的目的貌似与我原来的研究目的相背离”。
2.完全放弃或部分放弃““microRNAs and the MAPK pathway are involved in resistance to chemotherapy’观点。前者完全删掉这句话或这个暂不成立的观点，后者是用间接、委婉的语气来阐述这一“假设”，最好有文献支持。
何去何从，由作者定夺。但就这篇论文而言，如果作者尽量回答了所有审稿人的其他问题，即使不补该项试验，我想被接受的可能性也相当大。
这里，我想进一步强调的是，在英文论文中，作者尽量不要夸大、延伸该研究结果应该得出的理论价值和应用意义。应该“就事论事”。对于常发中文论文的作者尤其应引以为戒。谢谢夏老师的帮助，顶一个先。
31 March 2009 （第六讲）给审稿人的回复信
论文题目
：A (a chemical substance) inhibits oxidative stress induced adhesion between e
ndothelial cells and monocytes via NF-κB 所投杂志：
European Journal of Pharmacology. 结果：
这次大修后又被要求作论文格式调整，然后被接受 审稿人内容 （有删节）：
Comment 3: The last sentence at p.10 'The inhibition mechanism involved the downregulation B' is not supported by direct evidence, but by indirect evidence at the?of NF- most (see above). 作者原答 ：
We agree with the reviewer’s point. The experiment about the effect of A on the hydrogen-peroxide induced expression of B has been performed again （重复还是附加？要写清楚）, and the result showed that A?NF- B in hydrogen-peroxide induced?indeed down-regulated the expression of NF- vascular endothelial cells. So we do not revise the last sentence “The B”?inhibition mechanism involved the downregulation of NF- (最后一句与第一句矛盾。既然同意审稿人的观点，就应该作相应的修改。显然，作者并不太认可审稿人的观点，且有重复或附加试验支持。但即便如此，重复或附加试验也不能给出直接证据，所以，不可太绝对。其实，审稿人已经很明确但比较委婉的提出他/她的观点。那么，作者也应作相应让步。这样，审稿人才愿意接受。 建议改答 ：
The experiment determining the effect of A on the hydrogen-peroxide induced B has been performed again（重复还是附加？要写清楚）, and the results?expression of NF- B in hydrogen-peroxide?showed that A indeed down-regulated the expression of NF- induced vascular endothelial cells. Nevertheless, we accept the reviewer’s suggestion and have revised the last sentence slightly as “The inhibition mechanism is most likely to involve the downregulation of B”.?NF- 加注 ：