Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 266

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 142 of the 142 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Phage Therapy in the Resistance Era: Where Do We Stand and Where Are We Going?

Open access
Luong, Tiffany, Salabarria, Ann-Charlott, Roach, Dwayne R.·2020·Clinical Therapeutics

Abstract

PURPOSE: Widespread antibiotic-resistant bacteria are threatening the arsenal of existing antibiotics. Not only are antibiotics less likely to be effective today, but their extensive use continues to drive the emergence of multidrug-resistant pathogens. A new-old antibacterial strategy with bacteriophages (phages) is under development, namely, phage therapy. Phages are targeted bacterial viruses with multiple antibacterial effector functions, which can reduce multidrug-resistant infections within the human body. This review summarizes recent phage therapy clinical trials and patient cases and outlines the fundamentals behind phage treatment strategies under development, mainly through bench-to-bedside approaches. We discuss the challenges that remain in phage therapy and the role of phages when combined with antibiotic therapy. METHODS: This narrative review presents the current knowledge and latest findings regarding phage therapy. Relevant case reports and research articles available through the Scopus and PubMed databases are discussed. FINDINGS: Although recent clinical data suggest the tolerability and, in some cases, efficacy of phage therapy, the clinical functionality still requires careful definition. The lack of well-controlled clinical trial data and complex regulatory frameworks have driven the most recent human data generation on a single-patient compassionate use basis. These cases often include the concomitant use of antibiotics, which makes it difficult to draw conclusions regarding the effectiveness of phages alone. However, human data support using antibiotics as phage potentiators and resistance breakers; thus, phage adjuvants are a promising avenue for near-term clinical development. Current knowledge gaps exist on the appropriate routes of administration, phage selection, frequency of administration, dosage, phage resistance, and pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties of the phages. In addition, we highlight that some phage therapies have mild adverse effects in patients. IMPLICATIONS: Although more translational research is needed before the clinical implementation is feasible, phage therapy may well be pivotal in safeguarding humans against antibiotic-resistant infections.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.clinthera.2020.07.014

Cites

142 of 142 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 142 references

Cited by

See all 266

Metadata

Authors
Luong, T., Salabarria, A.-C., & Roach, D. R.
Venue
Clinical Therapeutics
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-09
Volume
42
Issue
9
Pages
1659-1680
ISSN
0149-2918 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3082973737
Cited by
266
References
142
FWCI
14.58
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Phage Therapy in the Resistance Era: Where Do We Stand and Where Are We Going? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.clinthera.2020.07.014
The paper
Luong, T., Salabarria, A.-C., & Roach, D. R. (2020). Phage Therapy in the Resistance Era: Where Do We Stand and Where Are We Going? Clinical Therapeutics. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinthera.2020.07.014

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.