ReviewViruses2026
The Therapeutic Potential of Phages in Multi-Drug Resistance Infections and Future Directions.
Review in Viruses, 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Phage therapy has been revisited as a biologically based strategy to tackle the escalating global crisis of multidrug-resistant (MDR) bacterial infections. Distinct from conventional antibiotics, bacteriophages target specific bacterial strains precisely, replicate locally at infection sites, penetrate bacterial biofilms, and exert synergistic effects with multiple antimicrobial agents. These inherent mechanistic advantages minimize collateral damage to the host's commensal microbiota. However, existing regulatory frameworks-originally established for chemically synthesized, mass-produced drugs-fail to accommodate personalized, living biological phage products, leading to uncertain approval pathways and inconsistent manufacturing supervision. Clinical experience of phage therapy is predominantly derived from compassionate-use cases via multiple administration routes, including intravenous, inhaled, and topical delivery. This review systematically analyzes major challenges restricting clinical application, such as standardized production, quality control, pharmacokinetic characterization, rapid pathogen identification, and regulatory adaptation, as well as the limited performance of fixed phage cocktails against genetically heterogeneous bacterial populations. Current clinical practice demonstrates that phage therapy exhibits acceptable safety profiles across intravenous, inhaled, and topical administration routes, with promising therapeutic outcomes in otherwise untreatable MDR infections. Nevertheless, stable and reproducible clinical outcomes are hindered by multiple scientific and operational obstacles: the absence of unified standards for phage production and quality control, insufficient understanding of route-dependent pharmacokinetics, the imperative demand for rapid pathogen identification to enable precise phage matching, and the limited efficacy of fixed-cocktail regimens against genetically diverse clinical isolates. The successful integration of phage therapy into routine clinical practice relies on coordinated progress in diagnostic infrastructure construction, GMP-compliant phage repository establishment, international regulatory harmonization, and high-quality evidence generation through well-designed clinical trials. Rather than serving as a universal substitute for antibiotics, phage therapy is best implemented as a precision complementary component within comprehensive antimicrobial stewardship strategies.
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.