Talk:RNA therapeutics/Archive 1

RNA Therapeutics Peer Review
Just from my initial impressions, it seems like you organized the mRNA, Antisense RNA, and RNAi sections really well, but then RNA Aptamers breaks that trend as a big wall of text. It might be a good idea to either break that up into subsections or condense the information somehow.

It may be a good idea to use an image that is not from a journal article, I think this was touched on in Yulia's presentation.

The first sentence of your summary seems like it could be changed to better describe RNA; "special and important effects" seems a little too vague, and it doesn't really read like an information-oriented article should. I'd argue that the last sentence in the summary is a little unnecessary as well, since you probably don't need to 'introduce' the topic on Wikipedia like you would in other forms of writing but that feels like more of an opinion-related thing.

I'm not sure if saying that mRNA is translated "instantly" in the cytoplasm is accurate in the first paragraph under the "mRNA" subheading but I'm by no means an expert on the topic. Maybe consider citing a source for this?

The second sentence under the "mRNA" subheading seems a bit simplistic, and doesn't really make sense logically; proteins being put into the human body isn't really caused by "putting the drug factories inside the human." I would consider revising and/or adding a citation somewhere in there, either after that sentence or at the end of the paragraph if it's all information from the same source. Also, the results from a quick google search for "mRNA uptake" seem to contradict the implication that mRNA cannot enter into the cell in this paragraph. This paragraph seems to make a lot of claims and does not have any source to back them up.

A citation is needed for the info in the fourth paragraph under the "mRNA" subheading.

Consider defining what "miRs" are in paragraph under "Antisense RNA" subheading, or if this is an abbreviation, give the full term before using abbreviation. Also consider changing "... the protein for which it holds the recipe" to something like "...the protein which it encodes". The sentence, "With the development of antisense RNA, investigating the functions of antisense RNAs has emerged as a hot research field" doesn't seem to make sense. Antisense RNAs were discovered, not developed.

Citations 21, 22, and 23 should be before the comma in the first sentence under the "RNA Aptamers" subheading. Citations at the end of sentences should also be before the period. I'm curious, how does a low dissociation constant demonstrate your point in the middle of this first paragraph? Wouldn't this just show that they bind strongly, rather than selectively, as you say?

After reading through the whole article, I would really love to see the "RNA Aptamers" section broken up to make it a bit less overwhelming, especially because this section is so interesting!

Minor grammatical issues: - Possessive apostrophe needed on "RNAs potential" in the second sentence in the summary. - Space needed between "RNA" and "(mRNA)" in the first sentence under the "mRNA" subheading. - "RNAs" in second sentence of first paragraph under "mRNA' subheading should just be "RNA"; "RNA" can be both plural and singular. - The second sentence in first paragraph under "mRNA" subheading is a sentence fragment; consider changing to "...mRNA is made in the nucleus..." - First sentence in second paragraph under "mRNA" subheading: past tense used for "reached" does not fit, consider changing to present tense.  - Second sentence of second paragraph under "mRNA" subheading: comma needed after "Thus".  - The first sentence of the third paragraph under the "mRNA" subheading is a sentence fragment.  - Space needed between "naked mRNA" and "(a purified..." in the third paragraph under the "mRNA" subheading.  - Change "this" to "these" in last sentence of third paragraph under the "mRNA" subheading.  - Change "Astra Zeneca" to "AstraZeneca" in second sentence of fourth paragraph under the "mRNA" subheading. - In-text citations should be inside sentences, without a space and before each period in the paragraph under the "Antisense RNA" subheading. - Sentence fragment in paragraph under the "Antisense RNA" subheading: "Particularly miRs 15 and 16 to a patient in need of the treatment for diagnosis and prophylaxis of cancer." - Consider adding Oxford comma after "diabetes" in paragraph under the "Antisense RNA" subheading. - Change "posttranslational" to "post-translationally" in first paragraph under "RNAi" subheading. Also change "affecters" to "effectors". - Change period to comma in first sentence under "siRNA" subheading. - "RISC complex" is repetitive in the paragraph under the "siRNA" subheading, since the "C" stands for "Complex". - Add "the" before "drug" in third sentence under "siRNA" subheading. - Remove the three cases of a second period in paragraph under the "siRNA" subheading. - Remove comma after "pair" in first paragraph under "miRNA" subheading. - Change "for" to "form" in first paragraph under "miRNA" subheading. - Change "work" to "works" in first paragraph under "miRNA" subheading. - Remove comma after "...phage display" in first paragraph under "RNA Aptamers" subheading. Comma needed after "...by antibodies" - Change "though" to "through" in last sentence of fourth paragraph under "RNA Aptamers" subheading. - Remove comma after "peptides" and add comma after "proteins" in third sentence of fifth paragraph under "RNA Aptamers" subheading. - Change "in vevo" to "in vivo" in seventh paragraph under "RNA Aptamers" subheading. - Italicize "in vivo" in first sentence of eighth paragraph under "RNA Aptamers" subheading. - Change "in vevo" to "in vivo" in second sentence of eighth paragraph under "RNA Aptamers" subheading. - Sentence needs revising in eighth paragraph under "RNA Aptamers" subheading: "Modifications can be added to prevent nuclease degradation include a 2’ fluoro or amino group as well as a 3’ inverted thymidine."

This is a bit nit-picky but I think your article would look a bit cleaner if it was formatted so that each subheading under "RNA Therapeutics" was its own heading, and the "RNA Therapeutics" heading was removed since it will be the title. Also, I think the summary section generally goes before the Contents Box, but I could be wrong!

Overall, great job on the article so far! I was really pleased with how your sections linked to other pages on Wikipedia at so many points. I went into a lot of detail in this review, so I hope that my comments don't come off as anything other than constructive critiques. I'm excited to see the final product for this article!

Antknee1 (talk) 04:21, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

RNA Therapeutics Peer Review 1
This article is very elaborate, great job! The article captures every bit of detail and includes enough context for the most part, that even a non-specialist could appreciate it. Overall there isn't much I would change, but I recommend some few edits to make this article even better.

The organization is a little bit off and there are some grammatical reconstructions needed. mRNAs, Antisense RNAs, RNA aptamers and RNAi should have their own paragraphs. SiRNA and MiRNA should be subs under RNAi. You could also write "RNAi" as "RNA interference (RNAi)" for the sake of a non-speScialist.

Some of the sentences are too long, you lose the essence after reading it. For instance, "Research has begun to explore RNAs potential to be used for therapeutic benefit,.....". You could break it down into two sentences to make it easier for the reader.

The first statement under miRNAs is a bit misleading (miRNA are short, ~22 base pair long, pieces of RNA that fold back on itself to for hairpin structures). There is pri-miRNA, pre-miRNA and then the mature duplex which is loaded unto the Argo proteins to form the miRISC complex. Each structure is different. The pre-miRNA for instance has the hairpin structure, so you have to specify or if possible erase that.

On the last paragraph, you wrote in vitro assays assist in determining the phenotypic "affects"(I think it should be "effects") of miRNAs. What is the significance of this assay? That statement is a bit vague and you could provide a bit of context.

For a rewrite, I would recommend the above changes, but overall this is very interesting article. Nice work! Garhingh (talk) 10:17, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

MLibrarian Review
Although it is somewhat risky to suggest a new topic on Wiki, I think this is an important topic that shall be present on Wiki. One thing that can help retaining this article on Wiki is to provide hyperlinks to existing articles. For example: Antisense therapy When you start your sections, I would recommend to always provide spelled out name, e.g. Small interfering RNA (siRNA). For siRNA there is a good article on Therapeutic applications and challenges, so please link to it and see how your description complements that older article. Therapeutic applications and challenges written for Small interfering RNA is a good example that you may want to adopt in your article. MLibrarian (talk) 15:46, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Meredith's comments
I think this reads pretty well so far, but I do have a few comments. I think you really need to focus on making the text sound more encyclopedic, rather than like you are writing a paper or a literature review. You just need to present the information in a straight forward way, while maintaining clarity. You definitely need a lead/intro paragraph. What you have written directly under RNA therapeutics, sounds much more like the intro to a research paper, and lacks concrete details. I appreciate that that is how we are traditionally taught to write, but that is not necessary here. Over all though, I think you have a lot of great information here. And I think organization and language construction is what you need to focus on. I would also consider adding a figure or two to demonstrate some of the broader ideas. You should also check out Moderna’s wiki page, could provide more context/how to introduce RNA therapeutics. Also you may consider adding a section about the potential role that mRNA therapeutics could play in treatment of corona.

I look forward to seeing the final product. Well done! Purchalm (talk) 16:20, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Comment on one suggestion
One reviewer stated that citations should be included before commas and periods in sentences. However, after looking at several other Wikipedia articles, I think the way that we initially had the citations formatted is correct. We have kept the citations after commas and periods in the sentences. Biophysical Endosymbiont (talk) 17:41, 1 December 2020 (UTC)