Role of Hypovitaminosis D in the Pathogenesis of Obesity-Induced Insulin Resistance

Round  1

Reviewer 1 Report

This summary of the role of vitD in the pathophysiology of HypoVitD is  a truncated version of the more extensive review just published in Nutrients by Szymaczak-Pajor in 'Nutrients April 2019'.  so what was detailed in 28pages and more in depth in that paper is now reduced to 9 pages with more focus on hypoVitD than vitD, in general, and insulin resistance.. This makes it somewhat different, even if not as detailed.

it is not a bad summary or otherwise inaccurate,even tho it loses its novelty and timeliness because of  the above paper just published.  It does have a couple of issues with sentence structure and English syntax..

line 38

line 41 [tab]??

line 46 'review' ?

line 56 [vitB1 [thiamine]

line 74   'then'

line 99-100  which mouse strain, age, gender, and what dose vitD?

line 119  through-by?

lines 165-167  awkward syntax

the new publication by Pittas et al NEnglJournMed '19 on a large clinical intervention with 4K IU vitD/day for several years showing no effect on preventing T2DM in 'at risk' obese humans needs to be included here....and point out the limitations of that study relative to the presnet review on hypoVITD, ie. that vitD does not have much effect unless the population is having a hypovitD status.., in keeping with the general theme of this review.....  in essence, older adults without vitD insufficiency are not improved by vitD in terms of T2DM prevention.

Author Response

We thank the Reviewer for his/her careful revision of the manuscript. We have included the correction requested and modified the manuscript accordingly. Furthermore, we have also included, among the references, the recent paper by Pittas.

Reviewer 2 Report

In this review article, authors summarized the studies exploring the role of hypovitaminosis D in the pathogenesis of obesity-induced insulin resistance and listed 82 references ranged from 1981 to 2019.

Need to correct following:

Line 165: it should be calcitriol 0.5 mcg, NOT 0,5 mcg

Author Response

We thank the Reviewer for the positive comments regarding our manuscript. We have corrected line 165.

This manuscript is a resubmission of an earlier submission. The following is a list of the peer review reports and author responses from that submission.