ArticleJAC-antimicrobial resistance2025
Article in JAC-antimicrobial resistance, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- AUBFM01 Phage as a Therapeutic Candidate Against MDRMicroorganisms · 2026Article
- Advances in phage therapy forFrontiers in microbiology · 2026Review
- Combating multidrug-resistant uropathogenic E. coli using lytic phages, enhancing antibiotic synergy and inhibiting biofilms.International microbiology : the official journal of the Spanish Society for Microbiology · 2025Article
- PEGylation Overcomes Pharmacological Barriers to Improve Systemic Pharmacokinetics and Therapeutic Efficacy of Phages against MDRJournal of microbiology and biotechnology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The increasing prevalence of carbapenem-resistant Methods: The PK and PD properties of Results: After administration, vB_AbaSt_W16 rapidly disseminated systemically within 1 h, reaching peak concentrations at 8 h. Most tissues cleared the phage within 72 h, though residual amounts persisted in the spleen for up to 92 h. In a murine infection model, vB_AbaSt_W16 demonstrated potent antibacterial activity, reducing CRAB bacterial loads by 4-7 log₁₀ cfu/mL within 24 h. Compared with PO administration, IP administration resulted in higher systemic bioavailability and bacterial clearance. Fluorescence imaging enabled non-invasive, real-time monitoring of phage distribution, demonstrating its utility as a PK assessment tool. Notably, phage treatment did not trigger significant pro-inflammatory cytokine release (TNF-α, IL-6) in healthy mice and effectively reduced CRAB-induced inflammation. Conclusions: These findings highlight the therapeutic potential of vB_AbaSt_W16 and provide critical insights into its PK behaviour. The results support further clinical development of this phage for CRAB infections.
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.