Effectiveness and Safety of Boesenbergia rotunda Extract on 3T3-L1 Preadipocytes and Its Use in Capsaicin-Loaded Body-Firming Formulation: In Vitro Biological Study and In Vivo Human Study

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The research work entitled “Effectiveness and safety of Boesenbergia rotunda extract on 3T3- L1 preadipocytes and the use in capsaicin-loaded body firming formulation: in vitro biological study and in vivo human study” is directed to evaluate and prove synergistic impacts of antiobesity agents from B. rotunda extract and capsaicin for their effectiveness and safety for topical application. The work is novel and falls in the scope of journal. The section of articles, explained properly with sufficient literature support and data.

The comments are as follows:

1.      Why safely is targeted in this study? Is there any reported adverse or side effects?

2.      How dose/concentration decided for this study?

3.      Citation to methods necessary if they are not novel or developed. E.g. 2.2., 2.3 etc

4.      How age groups of healthy volunteers selected between 17-50? Any exclusion criteria were there?

5.      Please make figure 2 labels more informative and explanatory.

6.      If volunteer take bath do, they remove the formulations, as study indicated for 28 days?

 

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The article entitled ‘Effectiveness and safety of Boesenbergia rotunda extract on 3T3-2 L1 preadipocytes and the use in capsaicin-loaded body firming 3 formulation: in vitro biological study and in vivo human study’ shows the activity of B. rotunda in lipid reduction in adipocytes, inhibition of their maturation and it potential use as body firming products.

I have some minor questions and concerns:

1.       Is panduratin A the main active compound in the extract in the context of adipogenesis? In the discussion, the authors also mention other metabolites. Why was only the panduratin A content monitored? What looks like a chromatogram of that extract?

2.       Section2.1.  – Please add the panduratin A producer and grade.

3.       Section 2.5. line 127 please specify the type of the extract (ethanolic?)

4.       If it is a method of 'standardisation of extracts', please add the retention time of panduratin A.

5.       Latin names should be written in italics. In the results part and in the discussion, the authors use normal font.

6.       Lines 159/160 and 284. It would be better to use the thigh instead of the upper leg like in Fig. 3 or in line 164.

7.       The mathematical formulas 2-4 could be written as the first one. It is more readable.

8.       Fig. 1. In the whole text, authors use mL not ml notification of unit.

9.       Fig. 5. Why there is no photo from day 7. The magnification of day 0 seems to be smaller than others. Is everything right? If so, there is a huge difference in the appearance of the skin. It should be discussed.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf