Volume 14, Issue 2 (2-2026)                   JoMMID 2026, 14(2): 98-107 | Back to browse issues page

Ethics code: N/A

XML Print

Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Okonji K S. Bacteriophages at the Chemistry Interface: Chemical, Genomic, and Structural Strategies for Targeted Therapeutics. JoMMID 2026; 14 (2) :98-107
URL: http://jommid.pasteur.ac.ir/article-1-758-en.html
Bacteriophages at the Chemistry Interface: Chemical, Genomic, and Structural Strategies for Targeted Therapeutics
Kanayo Samuel Okonji *
1Department of Chemistry, Federal University Oye-Ekiti, Ekiti State, Nigeria; 2Department of Health Sciences, University of the People, Pasadena, California, USA.
Abstract:   (879 Views)
This review examines the molecular chemistry and structural biology of bacteriophages as emerging targeted therapeutics, focusing on how chemical and genetic engineering can enhance phage specificity and therapeutic potential to address antimicrobial resistance. A narrative review was conducted following the Assessment of Narrative Review Articles (SANRA) guidelines. Literature searches in PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar (2015–2026, with inclusion of earlier seminal studies where necessary) used terms including "bacteriophage", "phage therapy", "endolysin", "holin", "phage engineering", "chemical modification", and "genomics". Studies were included if they were relevant to phage structural biology, enzymatic lysis, chemical modification, genomic annotation, or therapeutic development. Non-English publications and standalone conference abstracts were excluded. Forty references met inclusion criteria. Bacteriophages show species- and strain-specific host recognition mediated by tail fiber and baseplate variation; furthermore, genome-packaging efficiency differs among phage types, influencing replication and burst size. Chemical modifications, including conjugation of polyethylene glycol (PEG) chains (PEGylation) and surface ligand conjugation, improve phage stability, circulation time, and bacterial targeting, while clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats (CRISPR)-based engineering enables customized host specificity. Hybrid phage–nanoparticle systems further enhance delivery precision and biofilm penetration. Collectively, these findings show that rational design and molecular engineering can transform natural phages into programmable therapeutic agents. Bacteriophages can be chemically and genetically engineered to enhance specificity and therapeutic potential. Their structure–function relationships, enzymatic precision, and genomic adaptability position them as promising agents against multidrug-resistant pathogens. Integrating chemistry, bioinformatics, and synthetic biology supports next-generation phage therapeutics with improved targeting and efficacy; however, programmability currently relies on empirically guided engineering rather than fully predictable design frameworks, underscoring the need for continued mechanistic research.This review examines the molecular chemistry and structural biology of bacteriophages as emerging targeted therapeutics, focusing on how chemical and genetic engineering can enhance phage specificity and therapeutic potential to address antimicrobial resistance. A narrative review was conducted following the Assessment of Narrative Review Articles (SANRA) guidelines. Literature searches in PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar (2015–2026, with inclusion of earlier seminal studies where necessary) used terms including "bacteriophage", "phage therapy", "endolysin", "holin", "phage engineering", "chemical modification", and "genomics". Studies were included if they were relevant to phage structural biology, enzymatic lysis, chemical modification, genomic annotation, or therapeutic development. Non-English publications and standalone conference abstracts were excluded. Forty references met inclusion criteria. Bacteriophages show species- and strain-specific host recognition mediated by tail fiber and baseplate variation; furthermore, genome-packaging efficiency differs among phage types, influencing replication and burst size. Chemical modifications, including conjugation of polyethylene glycol (PEG) chains (PEGylation) and surface ligand conjugation, improve phage stability, circulation time, and bacterial targeting, while clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats (CRISPR)-based engineering enables customized host specificity. Hybrid phage–nanoparticle systems further enhance delivery precision and biofilm penetration. Collectively, these findings show that rational design and molecular engineering can transform natural phages into programmable therapeutic agents. Bacteriophages can be chemically and genetically engineered to enhance specificity and therapeutic potential. Their structure–function relationships, enzymatic precision, and genomic adaptability position them as promising agents against multidrug-resistant pathogens. Integrating chemistry, bioinformatics, and synthetic biology supports next-generation phage therapeutics with improved targeting and efficacy; however, programmability currently relies on empirically guided engineering rather than fully predictable design frameworks, underscoring the need for continued mechanistic research.
 
Keywords: Bacteriophages, Phage therapy, Synthetic biology, Endolysins, Holins, Nanomedicine, Genomics, Antimicrobial resistance
Full-Text [PDF 963 kb]   (113 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Review article | Subject: Other
Received: 2025/07/30 | Accepted: 2026/02/21 | Published: 2026/09/7
References
1. Antimicrobial Resistance Collaborators. Global burden of bacterial antimicrobial resistance in 2019: a systematic analysis. Lancet. 2022; 399 (10325): 629-55. [DOI:10.1016/S0140-6736(21)02724-0] [PMID]
2. O'Neill J. Tackling drug-resistant infections globally: final report and recommendations [Internet]. London: Review on Antimicrobial Resistance; 2016 [cited 2026 Jul 31]. Available from: https://amr-review.org/sites/default/files/160518_Final%20paper_with%20cover.pdf
3. Lee JH, Shin H, Ryu S. Bacteriophage-based antimicrobials and their potential use against multidrug-resistant bacteria. J Microbiol. 2022; 60 (2): 91-8.
4. Oduor JMO, Onkoba N, Maloba F, Arodi WO, Nyachieo A. Bacteriophage therapy: a promising alternative in the age of antimicrobial resistance. Front Pharmacol. 2022; 13: 872816.
5. Huang L, Xiang Y. Structures of the tailed bacteriophages that infect Gram-positive bacteria. Curr Opin Virol. 2020; 45: 65-74. [DOI:10.1016/j.coviro.2020.09.002] [PMID]
6. Steed JW, Atwood JL. Supramolecular Chemistry. 3rd ed. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons; 2022.
7. Young R. Phage lysis: do we have the hole story yet? Curr Opin Microbiol. 2013; 16 (6): 790-7. [DOI:10.1016/j.mib.2013.08.008] [PMID] [PMCID]
8. Schmelcher M, Donovan DM, Loessner MJ. Bacteriophage endolysins as novel antimicrobials. Future Microbiol. 2012; 7 (10): 1147-71. [DOI:10.2217/fmb.12.97] [PMID] [PMCID]
9. Van Belleghem JD, Dąbrowska K, Vaneechoutte M, Barr JJ, Bollyky PL. Interactions between bacteriophage, bacteria, and the mammalian immune system. Viruses. 2019; 11 (1): 10. [DOI:10.3390/v11010010] [PMID] [PMCID]
10. Andrade-Martínez JS, Camelo Valera LC, Chica Cárdenas LA, Forero-Junco L, López-Leal G, Moreno-Gallego JL, et al. Computational tools for the analysis of uncultivated phage genomes. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev. 2022; 86 (2): e0000421. [DOI:10.1128/mmbr.00004-21] [PMID] [PMCID]
11. Edwards RA, McNair K, Faust K, Raes J, Dutilh BE. Computational approaches to predict bacteriophage-host relationships. FEMS Microbiol Rev. 2016; 40 (2): 258-72. [DOI:10.1093/femsre/fuv048] [PMID] [PMCID]
12. Asija K, Teschke CM. A hydrophobic network: intersubunit and intercapsomer interactions stabilizing the bacteriophage P22 capsid. J Virol. 2019; 93 (14): e00727-19. [DOI:10.1128/JVI.00727-19] [PMID] [PMCID]
13. Tzlil S, Kindt JT, Gelbart WM, Ben Shaul A. Forces and pressures in DNA packaging and release from viral capsids. Biophys J. 2003; 84 (3): 1616-27. [DOI:10.1016/S0006-3495(03)74971-6] [PMID] [PMCID]
14. Mateu MG, editor. Structure and physics of viruses. Cham: Springer; 2018.
15. de Jonge PA, Nobrega FL, Brouns SJJ, Dutilh BE. Molecular and evolutionary determinants of bacteriophage host range. Trends Microbiol. 2019; 27 (3): 251-65. [DOI:10.1016/j.tim.2018.08.006] [PMID]
16. Aksyuk AA, Rossmann MG. Bacteriophage assembly. Viruses. 2011; 3 (3): 172-203. [DOI:10.3390/v3030172] [PMID] [PMCID]
17. Peters DL, Gaudreault F, Chen W. Functional domains of Acinetobacter bacteriophage tail fibers. Front Microbiol. 2024; 15: 1230997. [DOI:10.3389/fmicb.2024.1230997] [PMID] [PMCID]
18. Young R. Phage lysis: three steps, three choices, one outcome. J Microbiol. 2014; 52 (3): 243-58. [DOI:10.1007/s12275-014-4087-z] [PMID] [PMCID]
19. Maghsoodi A, Chatterjee A, Andricioaei I, Perkins NC. How the phage T4 injection machinery works including energetics, forces, and dynamic pathway. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2019; 116 (50): 25097-105. [DOI:10.1073/pnas.1909298116] [PMID] [PMCID]
20. Hernandez-Morales AC, Lessor LL, Wood TL, Migl D, Mijalis EM, Cahill J, et al. Genomic and biochemical characterization of Acinetobacter podophage Petty reveals a novel lysis mechanism and tail-associated depolymerase activity. J Virol. 2018; 92 (6): e01064-17. [DOI:10.1128/JVI.01064-17] [PMID] [PMCID]
21. Bernheim A, Sorek R. The pan-immune system of bacteria: antiviral immunity as a community. Nat Rev Microbiol. 2020; 18 (11): 644-54. [DOI:10.1038/s41579-019-0278-2] [PMID]
22. Love MJ, Abeysekera GS, Muscroft-Taylor AC, Billington C, Dobson RCJ. On the catalytic mechanism of bacteriophage endolysins: opportunities for engineering. Biochim Biophys Acta Proteins Proteom. 2020; 1868 (1): 140302. [DOI:10.1016/j.bbapap.2019.140302] [PMID]
23. Kongari R, Rajaure M, Cahill J, Rasche E, Mijalis E, Berry J, et al. Phage spanins: diversity, topological dynamics and gene convergence. BMC Bioinformatics. 2018; 19 (1): 326. [DOI:10.1186/s12859-018-2342-8] [PMID] [PMCID]
24. Schmelcher M, Loessner MJ. Applications of bacteriophage endolysins in food safety and biotechnology. Curr Opin Biotechnol. 2021; 70: 76-87. [DOI:10.1016/j.copbio.2015.10.005] [PMID]
25. Saeed H, Padmesh S, Singh A, Singh SP, Siddiqui MH, Sen M, et al. Characterization of holins, the membrane proteins of coliphage ASEC2201: a genomewide in silico approach. Front Microbiol. 2025; 16: 1550594. [DOI:10.3389/fmicb.2025.1550594] [PMID] [PMCID]
26. Carmody CM, Goddard JM, Nugen SR. Bacteriophage capsid modification by genetic and chemical methods. Bioconjug Chem. 2021; 32 (3): 466-81. [DOI:10.1021/acs.bioconjchem.1c00018] [PMID] [PMCID]
27. Shi D, Beasock D, Fessler A, Szebeni J, Ljubimova JY, Afonin KA, et al. To PEGylate or not to PEGylate: immunological properties of nanomedicine's most popular component, polyethylene glycol and its alternatives. Adv Drug Deliv Rev. 2022; 180: 114079. [DOI:10.1016/j.addr.2021.114079] [PMID] [PMCID]
28. Hammers CM, Stanley JR. Antibody phage display: technique and applications. J Invest Dermatol. 2014; 134 (2): e17. [DOI:10.1038/jid.2013.521] [PMID] [PMCID]
29. Kilcher S, Loessner MJ. Engineering bacteriophages as versatile biologics. Trends Microbiol. 2019; 27 (4): 355-67. [DOI:10.1016/j.tim.2018.09.006] [PMID]
30. Kilcher S, Studer P, Muessner C, Klumpp J, Loessner MJ. Cross-genus rebooting of custom-made, synthetic bacteriophage genomes in L-form bacteria. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2018; 115 (3): 567-72. [DOI:10.1073/pnas.1714658115] [PMID] [PMCID]
31. Dedrick RM, Guerrero-Bustamante CA, Garlena RA, Russell DA, Ford K, Harris K, et al. Engineered bacteriophages for treatment of a patient with a disseminated drug-resistant Mycobacterium abscessus. Nat Med. 2019; 25 (5): 730-3. [DOI:10.1038/s41591-019-0437-z] [PMID] [PMCID]
32. Rotman SG, Sumrall E, Ziadlou R, Grijpma DW, Richards RG, Eglin D, et al. Local bacteriophage delivery for treatment and prevention of bacterial infections. Front Microbiol. 2020; 11: 538060. [DOI:10.3389/fmicb.2020.538060] [PMID] [PMCID]
33. Gallina A, Gallina M, Cona A, Vitulo P, Mularoni A, Provenzani A. Phage therapy at the crossroads between clinical promise and regulatory challenge. Pharmaceuticals (Basel). 2026; 19 (1): 162. [DOI:10.3390/ph19010162] [PMID] [PMCID]
34. Bouras G, Nepal R, Houtak G, Psaltis AJ, Wormald PJ, Vreugde S. Pharokka: a fast scalable bacteriophage annotation tool. Bioinformatics. 2023; 39 (1): btac776. [DOI:10.1093/bioinformatics/btac776] [PMID]
35. Villarroel J, Kleinheinz KA, Jurtz VI, Zschach H, Lund O, Nielsen M, et al. HostPhinder: a phage host prediction tool. Viruses. 2016; 8 (5): 116. [DOI:10.3390/v8050116] [PMID] [PMCID]
36. Jaiswal S, Singh LB, Kumar K, Bhardwaj A, Singh D, Jaiswal A, et al. Anti-CRISPR proteins: a weapon of phage-bacterial arm race for genome editing. Nucleus. 2024; 67: 47-59. [DOI:10.1007/s13237-023-00457-z]
37. Kiro R, Shitrit D, Qimron U. Efficient engineering of a bacteriophage genome using the type I-E CRISPR-Cas system. RNA Biol. 2014; 11 (1): 42-4. [DOI:10.4161/rna.27766] [PMID] [PMCID]
38. Green SI, Clark JR, Santos HH, Weesner KE, Salazar KC, Aslam S, et al. A retrospective, observational study of 12 cases of expanded-access customized phage therapy: production, characteristics, and clinical outcomes. Clin Infect Dis. 2023; 77 (8): 1079-91. [DOI:10.1093/cid/ciad335] [PMID] [PMCID]
39. Baethge C, Goldbeck-Wood S, Mertens S. SANRA-a scale for the quality assessment of narrative review articles. Res Integr Peer Rev. 2019; 4: 5. [DOI:10.1186/s41073-019-0064-8] [PMID]
40. Hershey AD, Chase M. Independent functions of viral protein and nucleic acid in growth of bacteriophage. J Gen Physiol. 1952; 36 (1): 39-56. [DOI:10.1085/jgp.36.1.39] [PMID] [PMCID]
Add your comments about this article : Your username or Email:
CAPTCHA
Send email to the article author

Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.