ArticleNature2016
Synchronized cycles of bacterial lysis for in vivo delivery.
Article in Nature, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 347 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
347 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 737 citations in OpenAlex.
- Engineered bacteria and engineered probiotics for intestinal disease therapy: a bibliometric and knowledge mapping analysis.Frontiers in microbiology · 2026Pooled it
- Bibliometric analysis of genetically engineered bacteria in tumor therapy.Frontiers in microbiology · 2026Pooled it
- Engineering tumor-colonizing E. coli Nissle 1917 for detection and treatment of colorectal neoplasia.Nature communications · 2024Trial
- Functionalized biomaterial platforms for interventional embolization therapy of hepatocellular carcinoma.Bioactive materials · 2027Review
- Leveraging the bacteria for enhanced cancer immunotherapy: from a perspective of synthetic biology.Cancer biology & therapy · 2026Review
- Engineered bacterial therapeutics from synthetic biology to clinical translation: A multi-database scientometric analysis, 2000-2026.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2026Review
- Engineered bacteria in disease diagnosis and therapy: A synthetic biology perspective.Synthetic and systems biotechnology · 2026Review
- Intratumoral microbiota in cancer immunotherapy: metabolic-epigenetic crosstalk and engineered bacterial therapeutics.Experimental hematology & oncology · 2026Review
- BiohybridMaterials today. Bio · 2026Article
- Engineering an arginine-nitric oxide circuit inTranslational cancer research · 2026Review
- Engineered probiotics for tumor-targeted combination chemoimmunotherapy.Science translational medicine · 2026Article
- Surface display of co-stimulatory ligand B7H2 on engineered bacteria enhances tumor immunotherapy.Cell reports. Medicine · 2026Article
- Bacterial engineering for cancer therapy.Nature cancer · 2026Review
- Microbial Signals in Cancer: Dissecting Host-Microbiota-Tumor Interactions and Potential Therapeutic Strategy.MedComm · 2026Review
- Engineered bacteria as exogenous organelle mimics restore PTEN and p53 tumor suppressor functions for cancer therapy.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Live Biotherapeutic Products (LBPs) as Promising Microbiome-Based Medicines for Colorectal Cancer (CRC): Mechanistic Basis, Therapeutic Applications, and Translational Challenges.Probiotics and antimicrobial proteins · 2026Review
- Modeling cancer with bacteria-integrated tumor microenvironments using biomaterials: Emerging concepts and opportunities.Materials today. Bio · 2026Review
- Opportunities for artificial intelligence and synthetic biology in designing living drug delivery systems.Advanced drug delivery reviews · 2026Review
- Tumor-specific antibodies elicited by engineered bacteria promote bladder cancer immunotherapy in preclinical mouse models.Science translational medicine · 2026Article
- Living Microbial Drugs.Chemistry (Weinheim an der Bergstrasse, Germany) · 2026Review
287 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
11 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The widespread view of bacteria as strictly pathogenic has given way to an appreciation of the prevalence of some beneficial microbes within the human body. It is perhaps inevitable that some bacteria would evolve to preferentially grow in environments that harbor disease and thus provide a natural platform for the development of engineered therapies. Such therapies could benefit from bacteria that are programmed to limit bacterial growth while continually producing and releasing cytotoxic agents in situ. Here we engineer a clinically relevant bacterium to lyse synchronously ata threshold population density and to release genetically encoded cargo. Following quorum lysis, a small number of surviving bacteria reseed the growing population, thus leading to pulsatile delivery cycles. We used microfluidic devices to characterize the engineered lysis strain and we demonstrate its potential as a drug delivery platform via co-culture with human cancer cells in vitro. Asa proof of principle, we tracked the bacterial population dynamics in ectopic syngeneic colorectal tumours in mice via a luminescent reporter. The lysis strain exhibits pulsatile population dynamics in vivo, with mean bacterial luminescence that remained two orders of magnitude lower than an unmodified strain. Finally, guided by previous findings that certain bacteria can enhance the efficacy of standard therapies, we orally administered the lysis strain alone or in combination with a clinical chemotherapeutic to a syngeneic mouse transplantation model of hepatic colorectal metastases. We found that the combination of both circuit-engineered bacteria and chemotherapy leads to a notable reduction of tumour activity along with a marked survival benefit over either therapy alone.Our approach establishes a methodology for leveraging the tools of synthetic biology to exploit the natural propensity for certain bacteria to colonize disease sites.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.