ReviewArchives of microbiology2026
Bacteriophage therapy for multidrug-resistant bacterial infections: recent advances, clinical evidence, and translational challenges.
Review in Archives of microbiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The increasing prevalence of multidrug-resistant (MDR) bacterial infections has substantially limited the effectiveness of existing antibiotics and highlights the need for alternative therapeutic strategies. Bacteriophage therapy has re-emerged as a potential option, largely due to its ability to selectively target bacterial pathogens, replicate at sites of infection, and disrupt biofilms. This review examines the key mechanisms underlying phage-mediated bacterial killing, including receptor-specific infection, lytic replication, and the action of phage-derived enzymes such as endolysins and depolymerases. Current clinical evidence, largely derived from compassionate-use cases and small case series rather than well-controlled randomized trials, suggests that phage therapy can be beneficial in selected patients with infections caused by organisms such as Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Acinetobacter baumannii, and Staphylococcus aureus, particularly when conventional treatments have failed. The potential advantages of combining phages with antibiotics are also discussed, although the extent and consistency of this synergy remain uncertain. Despite growing interest, the clinical development of phage therapy remains limited by several factors, including narrow host specificity, the emergence of phage resistance, host immune responses that lead to rapid phage clearance and the formation of neutralizing antibodies, heterogeneity in study designs, and the absence of standardized production and regulatory frameworks. Importantly, robust randomized controlled trials are still scarce, making it difficult to draw firm conclusions about efficacy. While recent advances in genomics and phage engineering are likely to support future progress, a clear gap remains between experimental promise and routine, standardized clinical application.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42283824What 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.