Treatment and Prevention of Bacterial Infections Using Bacteriophages: Perspectives on the Renewed Interest in the United States

  • Randall Kincaid


The treatment of bacterial infections using bacteriophage has been utilized for nearly a century in the Republic of Georgia, the former Soviet Union and more recently in Poland. However, its use as a medical intervention in the United States has not been widely supported, largely due to the lack of rigorous clinical data to support its use and specific concerns about the reliability of processes for preparing and characterizing such medications. However, there has been increasing interest in re-evaluating this approach as an alternative strategy to treat, and potentially to prevent, bacterial infections. This renewed interest has been driven primarily by concerns about the increasing resistance of bacterial pathogens to the antibiotics that are currently available. This chapter provides a perspective on the origins of this renewed interest in the United States and the opportunities that may exist for its use, both for medical emergencies where few alternatives are available and for medical indications where phage treatment may offer unique advantages. An effort is made to provide an overview of two recent workshops that were held to consider the medical uses of phage and to summarize current clinical efforts for phage-based interventions. Specific challenges that are related to the use and development of such bacteriophage products are also discussed.


  1. Abedon S, Kuhl S, Blasdel B, Kutter E (2011) Phage treatment of human infections. Bacteriophage 2:66–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barr J, Auro R, Furlan M et al (2013) Bacteriophage adhering to mucus provide a non–host-derived immunity. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 110:10771–10776CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Chan B, Turner P et al (2018) Phage treatment of an aortic graft infected with Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Evol Med Public Health 2018(1):61–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Drohan S, Levin S, Genfell B, Laxminarayan R (2019) Incentivizing hospital infection control. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 116:6221–6225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Hankin E (1896) L’action bactericide des eaux de la Jumna et du Gange sur le vibrion du cholera. Ann Inst Pasteur 10:511–523Google Scholar
  6. Jault P, Leclerc T, Jennes S et al (2019) Efficacy and tolerability of a cocktail of bacteriophages to treat burn wounds infected by Pseudomonas aeruginosa (PhagoBurn): a randomised, controlled, double-blind phase 1/2 trial. Lancet Infect Dis 19:35–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Leitner L, Sybesma W, Chanishvili N et al (2017) Bacteriophages for treating urinary tract infections in patients undergoing transurethral resection of the prostate: a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind clinical trial. BMC Urol 17:90–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Madhusoodanan J (2016) Viral soldiers. The Scientist 1:27–33Google Scholar
  9. Schooley R, Biswas B, Gill JJ et al (2017) Development and use of personalized bacteriophage-based therapeutic cocktails to treat a patient with a disseminated resistant Acinetobacter baumannii infection. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 61:e00954-17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Weber-Dąbrowska B, Mulczyk M, Górski A (2000) Bacteriophage therapy of bacterial infections: an update of our institute’s experience. Arch Immunol Ther Exp (Warsz) 48:547–551Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Randall Kincaid
    • 1
  1. 1.National Institute of Allergy and Infectious DiseasesNational Institutes of HealthBethesdaUSA

Personalised recommendations