Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34850676›Full record

ArticleMicrobiology (Reading, England)2021

Functional diversity increases the efficacy of phage combinations.

Rosanna C T Wright, Ville-Petri Friman, Margaret C M Smith, Michael A Brockhurst

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Microbiology (Reading, England), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Towards modeling phage therapy.PLoS computational biology · 2026
    Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Harnessing phages to tackle antimicrobial resistance: a Saudi Arabian perspective.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2025
    Review
  14. Multi-strain phage induced clearance of bacterial infections.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Rosanna C T WrightFaculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Ville-Petri FrimanDepartment of Biology, University of York, York, UK.
Margaret C M SmithDepartment of Biology, University of York, York, UK.
Michael A BrockhurstFaculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Phage therapy is a promising alternative to traditional antibiotics for treating bacterial infections. Such phage-based therapeutics typically contain multiple phages, but how the efficacy of phage combinations scales with phage richness, identity and functional traits is unclear. Here, we experimentally tested the efficacy of 827 unique phage combinations ranging in phage richness from one to 12 phages. The efficacy of phage combinations increased with phage richness. However, complementarity between functionally diverse phages allowed efficacy to be maximized at lower levels of phage richness in functionally diverse combinations. These findings suggest that phage functional diversity is the key property of effective phage combinations, enabling the design of simple but effective phage therapies that overcome the practical and regulatory hurdles that limit development of more diverse phage therapy cocktails.

Indexed as

Bacterial InfectionsBacteriophagesAnti-Bacterial AgentsHumansAnti-Bacterial Agentsbiodiversity–ecosystem functioningfunctional diversityphage therapy

Identifiers

PMID34850676
PMCPMC8743627

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.