Effects of DSPP and MMP20 Silencing on Key Signaling Pathways in Oral Squamous Cell Carcinoma Cells

Review Data

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

Comments: Yes, the topic is very relevant to the field of clinical oncology.
As for its contemporaneity, the use of RNA interference techniques, such as the use of short hairpin RNA (shRNA), to silence genes is a contemporary method in molecular biology.

As for its interest to researchers, the study's focus on the mechanisms of a common yet deadly disease like OSCC would attract a broad range of researchers in the field. These findings could lay the groundwork for the development of targeted therapies, an area of high interest in current oncology research.

In conclusion, this paper would likely be relevant, contemporary, and interesting for researchers in the field of clinical oncology.

Abstract & Keywords

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

Comments: The abstract does include all the necessary components.

Regarding keywords, they are appropriately chosen and accurately reflect the main content of the research. They include the main proteins studied (DSPP, MMP20), the cell signaling pathways (EGFR, RAS/RAF, MAPK, JNK, NF-kB, TGF β, GSK3β), and the disease context (Oral Cancer). These keywords should allow researchers interested in these specific areas to easily find this study.

One point of improvement could be the addition of "adenovirus-mediated short hairpin RNA" or "shRNA" as a keyword, as this represents a significant methodological aspect of the research. Similarly, the "OSCC cell line, OSC2" could be included as it is the specific cell line used for the study. These additions might help researchers interested in these specific methodologies or cell lines to find this study more easily.

Overall, the abstract is well-structured and the keywords are appropriately chosen, reflecting the core areas of the research.

Goal

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

Comments: Yes, the goal of the study is explicitly stated in the introduction. The researchers aim to understand the role of two specific proteins, Dentin Sialoprotein Phosphoprotein (DSPP) and Matrix Metalloproteinase 20 (MMP20), in oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) by investigating their effect on various signaling pathways implicated in OSCC when they are silenced in an OSCC cell line.

The formulation of the goal is clear and unambiguous.

Structure

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

Comments: The structure of the paper appears to be coherent and in line with the stated goal.

Discussion & Conclusion

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

Comments: The discussion is generally coherent and well structured. It aligns with the overall goal of the study by elucidating how the silencing of DSPP and MMP20 can impact major signaling pathways implicated in OSCC progression.

Literature

Q: Does the author utilize relevant literature?

Comments: Yes, the author utilizes relevant literature to support the information provided in the case report.

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?

Comments: The length of the paper appears to be adequate for the topic. 

Reducing the length could potentially remove important information and compromise the value of the case report.

Writing style

Q: Is it clear and understandable?

A: Yes, the text provided is clear and understandable.

Further comments on the paper

Comments: 

Certainly, there are several key strengths in this paper:

1. Rigorous Methodology:  Methodology appears to be well-designed, with a clear description of the cell culture conditions, the creation of silenced phenotypes, and the Western blot process. The use of shRNA to silence DSPP and MMP20, and verification of the silencing, lends credibility to the authors findings.
2. Implication of Findings: The results have important implications for understanding the molecular mechanisms of oral carcinogenesis and the potential role of DSPP and MMP20. This could pave the way for new diagnostic tools and therapeutic strategies, which is exciting.
3. Use of Data Analysis: The statistical analysis seems robust and the usage of multiple comparison tests to validate the significance of the results is commendable.
4. Well-structured Abstract and Introduction: The abstract and introduction effectively set the context and provide a good understanding of the purpose and rationale for the authors research. They also provide a concise summary of the methods and main findings.
5. Relevance and Timeliness: This research is particularly relevant given the current need for better diagnostic markers and therapeutic targets in OSCC, and it aligns well with current trends in oncology research which seek to understand the molecular mechanisms underlying cancer development and progression.
6. Reference to Prior Work: The authors adequately situated their work within the context of the existing literature, referencing prior studies on DSPP and MMP20. This helps to establish the credibility of their work and shows how their research is contributing to the broader field.

Overall, the paper is a substantial piece of scientific research and provides a strong foundation for future studies into the role of DSPP and MMP20 in OSCC.

Q: Would you recommend this manuscript for further publication?

A: Yes - This manuscript is recommended for further publication.

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

Thanks,
Science Repository Team