ArticleScientific reports2026
CApEsid biOfilm: a suggested pipeline for clinical phage microbiology for biofilm infections based on comparative method study.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Isolation and Characterization of ΦCA1NRNZ, a Lytic Bacteriophage Targeting the Emerging Device-Associated PathogenAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The rise of antibiotic-resistant infections, particularly those involving biofilms, presents a significant global health threat. Phage therapy, the use of bacteriophages as antimicrobial agents, offers promising solutions to this crisis. A critical component of phage therapy is the assessment of phage efficacy, in both the presence and absence of antibiotics, prior to clinical application. While considerable progress has been made using planktonic bacterial cultures, there remains an urgent need for standardized methods to evaluate phage efficacy against biofilms. In this study, we address this gap by systematically comparing ten different methods for quantifying phage activity in biofilm settings. Each method was evaluated using a panel of five anti-Pseudomonas aeruginosa phages, which were tested against both planktonic and biofilm cultures. Based on these comparisons, we propose a robust pipeline for detecting phage activity in biofilms. This pipeline, termed CApEsid biOfilm, integrates modified colony-forming unit (CFU) assays using stainless steel washers, crystal violet staining, extracellular DNA quantification using a dye, and extracellular ATP measurements. The pipeline was further validated with additional bacterial species and their respective phages. We also demonstrate its utility in detecting interactions between phages and antibiotics. Overall, this work presents a foundational pipeline that may enhance the clinical matching of phages for treating biofilm-associated infections, thereby improving the outcomes of phage therapy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.