The DOI matches its Crossref record; 77 of the 77 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Advantages and Limitations of Bacteriophages for the Treatment of Bacterial Infections
Open accessAbstract
Bacteriophages (BPs) are viruses that can infect and kill bacteria without any negative effect on human or animal cells. For this reason, it is supposed that they can be used, alone or in combination with antibiotics, to treat bacterial infections. In this narrative review, the advantages and limitations of BPs for use in humans will be discussed. PubMed was used to search for all of the studies published from January 2008 to December 2018 using the key words: "BPs" or "phages" and "bacterial infection" or "antibiotic" or "infectious diseases." More than 100 articles were found, but only those published in English or providing evidence-based data were included in the evaluation. Literature review showed that the rapid rise of multi-drug-resistant bacteria worldwide coupled with a decline in the development and production of novel antibacterial agents have led scientists to consider BPs for treatment of bacterial infection. Use of BPs to overcome the problem of increasing bacterial resistance to antibiotics is attractive, and some research data seem to indicate that it might be a rational measure. However, present knowledge seems insufficient to allow the use of BPs for this purpose. To date, the problem of how to prepare the formulations for clinical use and how to avoid or limit the risk of emergence of bacterial resistance through the transmission of genetic material are not completely solved problems. Further studies specifically devoted to solve these problems are needed before BPs can be used in humans.
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
Cites
Ecology of prokaryotic viruses
Weinbauer, M. G. (2004) · FEMS Microbiology Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.femsre.2003.08.001 · Cited by 1,771
Rodriguez-Mozaz, S., Chamorro, S., Marti, E., Huerta, B., Gros, M., Sànchez-Melsió, A., Borrego, C. M., Barceló, D., & Balcázar, J. L. (2015) · Water Research · doi:10.1016/j.watres.2014.11.021 · Cited by 1,623
Clokie, M. R. J., Millard, A. D., Letarov, A. V., & Heaphy, S. (2011) · Bacteriophage · doi:10.4161/bact.1.1.14942 · Cited by 1,149
Phage treatment of human infections
Abedon, S. T., Kuhl, S. J., Blasdel, B. G., & Kutter, E. M. (2011) · Bacteriophage · doi:10.4161/bact.1.2.15845 · Cited by 980
Dispersing biofilms with engineered enzymatic bacteriophage
Lu, T. K., & Collins, J. J. (2007) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0704624104 · Cited by 895
Jault, P., Leclerc, T., Jennes, S., Pirnay, J. P., Que, Y.-A., Resch, G., Rousseau, A. F., Ravat, F., Carsin, H., Le Floch, R., et al. (2019) · The Lancet Infectious Diseases · doi:10.1016/s1473-3099(18)30482-1 · Cited by 874
Wright, A., Hawkins, C. H., Änggård, E. E., & Harper, D. R. (2009) · Clinical Otolaryngology · doi:10.1111/j.1749-4486.2009.01973.x · Cited by 864
A century of the phage: past, present and future
Salmond, G. P. C., & Fineran, P. C. (2015) · Nature Reviews Microbiology · doi:10.1038/nrmicro3564 · Cited by 823
Sarker, S. A., Sultana, S., Reuteler, G., Moine, D., Descombes, P., Charton, F., Bourdin, G., McCallin, S., Ngom-Bru, C., Neville, T., et al. (2016) · EBioMedicine · doi:10.1016/j.ebiom.2015.12.023 · Cited by 533
Smith, H. W., & Huggins, M. B. (1982) · Microbiology · doi:10.1099/00221287-128-2-307 · Cited by 518
Cited by
Understanding bacterial biofilms: From definition to treatment strategies
Zhao, A., Sun, J., & Liu, Y. (2023) · Frontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology · doi:10.3389/fcimb.2023.1137947 · Cited by 743
Combating Implant Infections: Shifting Focus from Bacteria to Host
Amin Yavari, S., Castenmiller, S. M., van Strijp, J. A. G., & Croes, M. (2020) · Advanced Materials · doi:10.1002/adma.202002962 · Cited by 257
Genetically Engineered Microorganisms and Their Impact on Human Health
Mahdizade Ari, M., Dadgar, L., Elahi, Z., Ghanavati, R., & Taheri, B. (2024) · International Journal of Clinical Practice · doi:10.1155/2024/6638269 · Cited by 67
Bacteriophage Therapy: Discovery, Development, and FDA Approval Pathways
Niazi, S. K. (2025) · Pharmaceuticals · doi:10.3390/ph18081115 · Cited by 56
Kim, K., Jang, H., Kim, E., Kim, H., & Sung, G. Y. (2023) · Experimental Dermatology · doi:10.1111/exd.14940 · Cited by 24
Metadata
- Authors
- Principi, N., Silvestri, E., & Esposito, S.
- Venue
- Frontiers in Pharmacology
- Publisher
- Frontiers Media SA
- Published
- 2019-05-08
- Volume
- 10
- Pages
- 513-513
- ISSN
- 1663-9812 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2944502015
- Cited by
- 454
- References
- 77
- FWCI
- 29.35
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
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: Advantages and Limitations of Bacteriophages for the Treatment of Bacterial Infections. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3389/fphar.2019.00513
- The paper
- Principi, N., Silvestri, E., & Esposito, S. (2019). Advantages and Limitations of Bacteriophages for the Treatment of Bacterial Infections. Frontiers in Pharmacology. https://doi.org/10.3389/fphar.2019.00513
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.
