↓ Skip to main content

Development of Anti-Infectives Using Phage Display: Biological Agents against Bacteria, Viruses, and Parasites

Overview of attention for article published in Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy, June 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

patent
7 patents

Citations

dimensions_citation
88 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
298 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Development of Anti-Infectives Using Phage Display: Biological Agents against Bacteria, Viruses, and Parasites
Published in
Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy, June 2012
DOI 10.1128/aac.00567-12
Pubmed ID
Authors

Johnny X. Huang, Sharon L. Bishop-Hurley, Matthew A. Cooper

Abstract

The vast majority of anti-infective therapeutics on the market or in development are small molecules; however, there is now a nascent pipeline of biological agents in development. Until recently, phage display technologies were used mainly to produce monoclonal antibodies (MAbs) targeted against cancer or inflammatory disease targets. Patent disputes impeded broad use of these methods and contributed to the dearth of candidates in the clinic during the 1990s. Today, however, phage display is recognized as a powerful tool for selecting novel peptides and antibodies that can bind to a wide range of antigens, ranging from whole cells to proteins and lipid targets. In this review, we highlight research that exploits phage display technology as a means of discovering novel therapeutics against infectious diseases, with a focus on antimicrobial peptides and antibodies in clinical or preclinical development. We discuss the different strategies and methods used to derive, select, and develop anti-infectives from phage display libraries and then highlight case studies of drug candidates in the process of development and commercialization. Advances in screening, manufacturing, and humanization technologies now mean that phage display can make a significant contribution in the fight against clinically important pathogens.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 298 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 4 1%
United Kingdom 2 <1%
Japan 2 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Belgium 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 285 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 59 20%
Student > Master 55 18%
Student > Bachelor 44 15%
Researcher 37 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 19 6%
Other 42 14%
Unknown 42 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 91 31%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 73 24%
Immunology and Microbiology 25 8%
Chemistry 17 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 9 3%
Other 30 10%
Unknown 53 18%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 September 2023.
All research outputs
#8,534,528
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
#7,468
of 15,579 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#60,637
of 180,579 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
#43
of 106 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 15,579 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.2. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 180,579 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 106 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.