The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Bacteriophage Therapy Rescues Mice Bacteremic from a Clinical Isolate of Vancomycin-Resistant Enterococcus faecium
Open accessAbstract
Colonization of the gastrointestinal tract with vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium (VRE) has become endemic in many hospitals and nursing homes in the United States. Such colonization predisposes the individual to VRE bacteremia and/or endocarditis, and immunocompromised patients are at particular risk for these conditions. The emergence of antibiotic-resistant bacterial strains requires the exploration of alternative antibacterial therapies, which led our group to study the ability of bacterial viruses (bacteriophages, or phages) to rescue mice with VRE bacteremia. The phage strain used in this study has lytic activity against a wide range of clinical isolates of VRE. One of these VRE strains was used to induce bacteremia in mice by intraperitoneal (i.p.) injection of 10 9 CFU. The resulting bacteremia was fatal within 48 h. A single i.p. injection of 3 × 10 8 PFU of the phage strain, administered 45 min after the bacterial challenge, was sufficient to rescue 100% of the animals. Even when treatment was delayed to the point where all animals were moribund, approximately 50% of them were rescued by a single injection of this phage preparation. The ability of this phage to rescue bacteremic mice was demonstrated to be due to the functional capabilities of the phage and not to a nonspecific immune effect. The rescue of bacteremic mice could be effected only by phage strains able to grow in vitro on the bacterial host used to infect the animals, and when such strains are heat inactivated they lose their ability to rescue the infected mice.
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
Emerging Strategies to Combat ESKAPE Pathogens in the Era of Antimicrobial Resistance: A Review
Mulani, M. S., Kamble, E. E., Kumkar, S. N., Tawre, M. S., & Pardesi, K. R. (2019) · Frontiers in Microbiology · doi:10.3389/fmicb.2019.00539 · Cited by 1,644
Schooley, R. T., Biswas, B., Gill, J. J., Hernandez-Morales, A., Lancaster, J., Lessor, L., Barr, J. J., Reed, S. L., Rohwer, F., Benler, S., et al. (2017) · Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy · doi:10.1128/aac.00954-17 · Cited by 1,254
Self-citationFormulation, 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
The factors affecting effectiveness of treatment in phages therapy
Ly-Chatain, M. H. (2014) · Frontiers in Microbiology · doi:10.3389/fmicb.2014.00051 · Cited by 331
Halawa, E. M., Fadel, M., Al-Rabia, M. W., Behairy, A., Nouh, N. A., Abdo, M., Olga, R., Fericean, L., Atwa, A. M., El-Nablaway, M., et al. (2024) · Frontiers in Pharmacology · doi:10.3389/fphar.2023.1305294 · Cited by 280
Metadata
- Authors
- Biswas, B., Adhya, S., Washart, P., Paul, B., Trostel, A. N., Powell, B., Carlton, R., & Merril, C. R.
- Venue
- Infection and Immunity
- Publisher
- American Society for Microbiology
- Published
- 2002-01
- Volume
- 70
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 204-210
- ISSN
- 0019-9567 (ISSN-L)
- 1098-5522
- OpenAlex
- W2171338508
- Cited by
- 467
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 22.26
- 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: Bacteriophage Therapy Rescues Mice Bacteremic from a Clinical Isolate of Vancomycin-Resistant Enterococcus faecium. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1128/iai.70.1.204-210.2002
- The paper
- Biswas, B., Adhya, S., Washart, P., Paul, B., Trostel, A. N., Powell, B., Carlton, R., & Merril, C. R. (2002). Bacteriophage Therapy Rescues Mice Bacteremic from a Clinical Isolate of Vancomycin-Resistant Enterococcus faecium. Infection and Immunity. https://doi.org/10.1128/iai.70.1.204-210.2002
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.