ArticleScientific reports2025
Isolation and characterization of novel bacteriophages targeting Stenotrophomonas maltophilia.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Optimization of Dual-Bacteriophage Magnetic Nanoprobe for the Detection of Staphylococcus aureus and Pseudomonas aeruginosa.Macromolecular bioscience · 2026Article
- Isolation and characterisation of a novel Stenotrophomonas maltophilia phage vB_SmaS_BCU-1 with evaluation of mammalian cell safety.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2026Article
- Antimicrobial resistance mechanisms, treatment challenges, and emerging strategies inFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
21 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Stenotrophomonas maltophilia is a bacterium often resistant to antibiotics and is a significant cause of nosocomial infections, particularly in immunocompromised patients. Phage therapy has shown promise as a potential treatment for such difficult-to-treat bacterial infections, but research on phages targeting this bacterium is very limited. In this study, we isolated 34 phages using four clinical strains of S. maltophilia and evaluated their infectivity and bactericidal activity. While some phages infected all four strains, many exhibited strain-specific infectivity. We investigated the bacterial growth curves in response to three phages, named Yut1, Yut2, and Yut4, and found that all phages exhibited potent lytic activity against the clinical strains even at low doses. Genome analysis found that the phages did not carry any lysogeny genes, virulence factors, or antibiotic resistance genes, suggesting their high potential as therapeutic phages. Furthermore, phylogenetic analysis suggested that Yut1 and Yut4 belong to a novel phage lineage. These results highlight the therapeutic potential of our novel phages to combat the growing antibiotic resistance problem.
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.