ArticleJournal of biological engineering2025
Construction of probiotic Escherichia coli Nissle 1917 as a next-generation expression platform and its application in therapeutic protein production.
Article in Journal of biological engineering, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- An engineered probiotic Escherichia coli Nissle 1917 strain for Amuc_1100 delivery in a CT26 colorectal tumor model.Probiotics and antimicrobial proteins · 2026Article
- Functional characterization of the oligopeptide transporter operon oppABCDF-1 in Escherichia coli Nissle 1917.BMC microbiology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Biologics produced in Escherichia coli BL21(DE3) require rigorous removal of lipopolysaccharide (LPS), since even traces can trigger severe immune responses and potentially fatal sequelae in humans. In contrast, the clinically licensed probiotic Escherichia coli Nissle 1917 (EcN) is inherently LPS-deficient, displaying only 0.86% of the LPS activity observed in BL21(DE3). Due to its markedly reduced immunostimulatory activity, EcN is an attractive chassis for manufacturing proteins with minimal LPS burden. On the basis of the constructed strain EcN::T7 by inserting the T7 RNA polymerase gene into chromosome, using GFP as a model protein, this strain produced only 30% of the yield obtained from BL21(DE3) because both cell density (OD₆₀₀) and per-cell productivity were lower. To boost intracellular protein synthesis, we then used CRISPR/Cas9-mediated genome editing technology to knock out ompT, iclR, and arcA, yielding the high-producer EcN::T7ΔompTΔiclRΔarcA. This triple-deletion mutant produced 3.2-fold more reporter protein than its parental strain EcN::T7, reaching 70% of the BL21(DE3) output. When this strain was used to produce recombinant IFNα-2b, the final protein yield reached 89.3% of that achieved in BL21(DE3). Even without extra endotoxin-removal steps, the IFNα-2b purified from EcN::T7ΔompTΔiclRΔarcA contained the same low level as the product from the BL21(DE3) that had been through extensive downstream cleaning. By eliminating the need for costly LPS removal, the engineered EcN::T7ΔompTΔiclRΔarcA becomes an economical, clinical-ready biomanufacturing platform.
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.