The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Targeting Enterococcus faecalis Biofilms with Phage Therapy
Open accessAbstract
Phage therapy has been proven to be more effective, in some cases, than conventional antibiotics, especially regarding multidrug-resistant biofilm infections. The objective here was to isolate an anti- Enterococcus faecalis bacteriophage and to evaluate its efficacy against planktonic and biofilm cultures. E. faecalis is an important pathogen found in many infections, including endocarditis and persistent infections associated with root canal treatment failure. The difficulty in E. faecalis treatment has been attributed to the lack of anti-infective strategies to eradicate its biofilm and to the frequent emergence of multidrug-resistant strains. To this end, an anti- E. faecalis and E. faecium phage, termed EFDG1, was isolated from sewage effluents. The phage was visualized by electron microscopy. EFDG1 coding sequences and phylogeny were determined by whole genome sequencing (GenBank accession number KP339049 ), revealing it belongs to the Spounavirinae subfamily of the Myoviridae phages, which includes promising candidates for therapy against Gram-positive pathogens. This analysis also showed that the EFDG1 genome does not contain apparent harmful genes. EFDG1 antibacterial efficacy was evaluated in vitro against planktonic and biofilm cultures, showing effective lytic activity against various E. faecalis and E. faecium isolates, regardless of their antibiotic resistance profile. In addition, EFDG1 efficiently prevented ex vivo E. faecalis root canal infection. These findings suggest that phage therapy using EFDG1 might be efficacious to prevent E. faecalis infection after root canal treatment.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Cited by
Langdon, A., Crook, N., & Dantas, G. (2016) · Genome Medicine · doi:10.1186/s13073-016-0294-z · Cited by 912
Biofilms as Promoters of Bacterial Antibiotic Resistance and Tolerance
Uruén, C., Chopo-Escuin, G., Tommassen, J., Mainar-Jaime, R. C., & Arenas, J. (2020) · Antibiotics · doi:10.3390/antibiotics10010003 · Cited by 769
Formulation, stabilisation and encapsulation of bacteriophage for phage therapy
Malik, D. J., Sokolov, I. J., Vinner, G. K., Mancuso, F., Cinquerrui, S., Vladisavljevic, G. T., Clokie, M. R. J., Garton, N. J., Stapley, A. G. F., & Kirpichnikova, A. (2017) · Advances in Colloid and Interface Science · doi:10.1016/j.cis.2017.05.014 · Cited by 594
Biofilm-associated infection by enterococci
Ch’ng, J.-H., Chong, K. K. L., Lam, L. N., Wong, J. J., & Kline, K. A. (2019) · Nature Reviews Microbiology · doi:10.1038/s41579-018-0107-z · Cited by 447
Nir-Paz, R., Gelman, D., Khouri, A., Sisson, B. M., Fackler, J., Alkalay-Oren, S., Khalifa, L., Rimon, A., Yerushalmy, O., Bader, R., et al. (2019) · Clinical Infectious Diseases · doi:10.1093/cid/ciz222 · Cited by 265
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Khalifa, L., Brosh, Y., Gelman, D., Coppenhagen-Glazer, S., Beyth, S., Poradosu-Cohen, R., Que, Y.-A., Beyth, N., & Hazan, R.
- Venue
- Applied and Environmental Microbiology
- Publisher
- American Society for Microbiology
- Published
- 2015-04-15
- Volume
- 81
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 2696-2705
- ISSN
- 0099-2240 (ISSN-L)
- 1098-5336
- OpenAlex
- W2006674954
- Cited by
- 228
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 11.07
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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: Targeting Enterococcus faecalis Biofilms with Phage Therapy. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1128/aem.00096-15
- The paper
- Khalifa, L., Brosh, Y., Gelman, D., Coppenhagen-Glazer, S., Beyth, S., Poradosu-Cohen, R., Que, Y.-A., Beyth, N., & Hazan, R. (2015). Targeting Enterococcus faecalis Biofilms with Phage Therapy. Applied and Environmental Microbiology. https://doi.org/10.1128/aem.00096-15
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.