Australian Phage Network

We have published and advocated phage therapy [1-7]. Here we describe our effort to build a national consortium aimed at delivering phage therapeutics, in an Australian context.

Associate Professor Ruby CY Lin, Dr Ameneh Khatami, Dr Jessica C Sacher, Dr Pieter-Jan Ceyssens, Mr Jan Zheng, Dr Ali Khalid, Professor Jonathan R Iredell and the Australian Phage Network

Phage therapy currently means either empiric phage, or phage combinations (“cocktails”), with a broad spectrum of activity or the quick matching of phage/s to patient isolate for individualised treatment. Stability (shelf life) of phages alone or in combination, antagonism and synergy of phages and antibiotics, host responses to phage infusion, the pharmacokinetics, pharmaco-genomics and pharmaco-dynamics of therapy and its overall regulation and clinical implementation all present challenges. Nevertheless, an obvious first step is to develop large bank/s of phages and effective mechanisms to screen these against target isolate/s in a timely fashion. (We’ve outlined the trials and tribulations of setting up a phage biobank here,

Several high profile reports [7-11] are in turn driving industry investment in phage collections, with the global phage market projected to reach $1.4 billion USD by 2026 [12]. The underlying requirement common to all of these treatments has been the availability of safely-prepared phages with therapeutic properties. And yet, although thousands of phages are housed in research laboratories distributed globally, most labs are ill-equipped to prepare safe phage preparations for patients, and biotech companies with access to clinical-grade phage manufacturing are not readily able to access phages from researchers. Therefore, many treatable infections go untreated for reasons largely logistical in nature. Additional challenges are faced by clinicians treating children, where routine access to novel therapeutics, including phages, is often delayed [13].

The unmet need for establishing efficient phage research and development pipelines has never been clearer. Phage researchers and biotech companies around the world currently volunteer their time and resources to prepare phages in response to individual patient need [14-16], and yet nearly everyone expresses concerns that this practice, in its current ad hoc form, is at best unsustainable, and at worst may lead to unsafe phage applications that could compromise progress in the entire field. There is clearly a momentum now to build systems that drive integration and quality assurance of phage collections and preparations that can serve a global collective of clinicians, researchers, biotech companies and regulators.

Since our last blog on phage biobanking, we have developed a bit further in the phage research, clinical and biomanufacturing space, with a focus on optimal functions, key partners and systems, and sustainability of a phage biobank. Here we have a proposed roadmap for Australia’s first phage biobank and pathways to building the ecosystem to facilitate phage therapy initiatives in Australia (Fig 1). For example, a hub and spoke network model starts with the most experienced site, building capacity by sharing protocols, research and material. Clinical coordination and biobanking (of target microbes and candidate phages) link bio-surveillance to the supply chain. Tight coupling of the biobank to agreed protocols within the network is expected to accelerate research output, development of therapeutics and diagnostics and expedite clinical and regulatory processes (Fig 1).


Fig 1. Australian Phage Network

We noted the need for standardisation of terms and protocols. For example, Bacterial and Archaeal Viruses Subcommittee of the International Committee on the Taxonomy of Viruses establishes systematic nomenclature for phage genomes and consistent annotation for phage sequences [17]. This would facilitate accessibility of a biospecimen navigator platform and allows development of simple and efficient tools such as a “Phage Passport” [18-21], as demonstrated in Belgium’s Magistral Model [19]. Specifically, standardising quality parameters for the final phage product for distribution. The ‘phage passport’ may need to be defined within each jurisdiction but ideally would be globally competent, encompassing all jurisdictions requirements and using agreed common language and protocols. In an Australian context, we advocate a globally competent use of agreed common language and standardised administration and laboratory monitoring and follow-up protocols in order for phage therapy to be included in respective jurisdiction’s national formulary. By collaborating with international partners (e.g., Phage Directory,, this might reduce friction between stakeholders for maximum operational efficiency. Such ecosystems should serve to inform design of regulatory frameworks for phage therapy beyond immediate compassionate use, grounded on the bioethical principles of justice in healthcare that demands equitable access.

We are currently addressing ethical, legal, financial and governance, elements that are essential in all biobanking entities [22] but a user-pays cost-recovery model can help offset initial low utilisation, expand specimen collections and offset labour costs. There is a strong argument for public funds to support a public good, building on the community’s belief that good quality collection of biospecimens enhances biomedical research development and innovation [23].

In a broader context, support and collaborations from organisations such as the International Society for Biological and Environmental Repositories (ISBER) and the Biobanking and BioMolecular Resources Research Infrastructure-European Research Infrastructure Consortium (BBMRI-ERIC) are important to maintain sustainability. A globally coordinated phage biobanking network can assist in democratising access to phage therapy. In the Australian context at least, a networked phage biobank that identifies matched phage(s) for patient samples (personalised phage therapy) using NATA (National Association of Testing Authorities, Australia)-accredited diagnostic and identification services eligible for Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme rebates, properly integrated with state and national surveillance programs, is the ambition.


Seed funding for NSW Phage Biobank (JI and RCYL) and NSW Microbial Biobank (JI, RCYL et al.) was awarded by NSW Health, NSW State Government, Australia. Data linkage funding with CHeReL  for the biobanks was awarded by the Ministry of Health, NSW State Government, Australia (JI and RCYL). Australasian Society for Infectious Diseases Research Grant for Phage Therapy in CF kids (AK, HS and RCYL).


We would like to thank the Australian Phage Network (in alphabetical order): Jeremy J. Barr, Nouri Ben Zakour, Kim Chan, Barbara Chang, Alicia Fajardo Lubian, Lucy Furfaro, Josephine Ho, Bernie Hudson, Anthony Kicic, Jian Li, Leszek Lisowski, Trevor Lithgow, Susan Maddocks, Angela Netluch, David Paterson, Ian Paulsen, Matt Payne, Anton Peleg, Aleksandra Petrovic Fabijan, Indy Sandaradura, Vitali Sintchenko, Peter Speck, Steve Stick, Carola Venturini, Morgyn Warner, Karen Weynberg; Phage Network International Partners: Ran Nir-Paz, Ronen Hazan, Rob Lavigne, Jeroen Wagemans, Heejoon Myung, Nikoline S Olsen, Lars Hestbjerg Hansen, Graham Hatfull and broader network; Shawna McCallin, Jean-Paul Pirnay, Petar Knezevic, Miguel Artuor Barreto Sanz, Tobi Nagel, Minmin Yen, Bob Blasdel, Chip Schooley; NSW Ministry of Health, Kerry Chant, Antonio Penna, Anne O’Neill, Laura Collie, Julia Warning; NSW Statewide Biobank, Jennifer Byrne, Adam Robinson, Jane Carpenter; Westmead Biobank, Judith Head, Joey Lai and Maggie Wang, WIMR bioinformatics, Brian Gloss; The Centre for Health Record Linkage (CHeReL), Usha Salagame and the UNSW Recombinant Product Facility, Christopher Marquis and Hélène Lebhar.


  1. Gilbey T, Ho J, Cooley LA, Petrovic Fabijan A, Iredell JR: Adjunctive bacteriophage therapy for prosthetic valve endocarditis due to Staphylococcus aureus. Med J Aust 2019, 211:142-143.e141.
  2. Lin RCY, Petrovic Fabijan A: Current landscape on bacteriophage therapy - a discussion after attending Phage Futures Europe 2019, Belgium. Med J Aust 2019, Episode 42.
  3. Lin RCY, Petrovic Fabijan A, Atwood L, Iredell JR: State of the Regulatory Affair: Regulation of Phage Therapy in Australia. Capsid & Tail 2019.
  4. Maddocks S, Fabijan AP, Ho J, Lin RCY, Ben Zakour NL, Dugan C, Kliman I, Branston S, Morales S, Iredell JR: Bacteriophage Therapy of Ventilator-associated Pneumonia and Empyema Caused by Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2019, 200:1179-1181.
  5. Petrovic Fabijan A, Khalid A, Maddocks S, Ho J, Gilbey T, Sandaradura I, Lin RC, Ben Zakour N, Venturini C, Bowring B, et al.: Phage therapy for severe bacterial infections: a narrative review. Med J Aust 2019, 212:279-285.
  6. Petrovic Fabijan AP, Ben Zakour NL, Ho J, Lin RCY, Iredell J, Westmead Bacteriophage Therapy T, AmpliPhi Biosciences C: Polyclonal Staphylococcus aureus Bacteremia. Ann Intern Med 2019, 171:940-941.
  7. Petrovic Fabijan A, Lin RCY, Ho J, Maddocks S, Ben Zakour NL, Iredell JR, Westmead Bacteriophage Therapy T: Safety of bacteriophage therapy in severe Staphylococcus aureus infection. Nat Microbiol 2020, 5:465-472.
  8. Strathdee SA, Patterson T: The Perfect Predator: Hachette Books (February 26, 2019); 2019.
  9. Dedrick RM, Guerrero-Bustamante CA, Garlena RA, Russell DA, Ford K, Harris K, Gilmour KC, Soothill J, Jacobs-Sera D, Schooley RT, et al.: Engineered bacteriophages for treatment of a patient with a disseminated drug-resistant Mycobacterium abscessus. Nat Med 2019, 25:730-733.
  10. Cano EJ, Caflisch KM, Bollyky PL, Van Belleghem JD, Patel R, Fackler J, Brownstein MJ, Horne B, Biswas B, Henry M, et al.: Phage Therapy for Limb-threatening Prosthetic Knee Klebsiella pneumoniae Infection: Case Report and In Vitro Characterization of Anti-biofilm Activity. Clin Infect Dis 2020.
  11. Schooley RT, Biswas B, Gill JJ, Hernandez-Morales A, Lancaster J, Lessor L, Barr JJ, Reed SL, Rohwer F, Benler S, et al.: Development and Use of Personalized Bacteriophage-Based Therapeutic Cocktails To Treat a Patient with a Disseminated Resistant Acinetobacter baumannii Infection. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2017, 61.
  12. Daedal Research: Global Phage Therapy Market: Size, Trends & Forecasts (2019 Edition). Edited by; 2019.
  13. Shirkey H: Editorial comment: Therapeutic orphans. The Journal of Pediatrics 1968, 72:119-120.
  14. McCallin S, Sacher JC, Zheng J, Chan BK: Current State of Compassionate Phage Therapy. Viruses 2019, 11.
  15. Sacher J, Zheng J: Phage Therapy Collaboration and Compassionate Use. In Bacteriophages: Biology, Technology, Therapy. Edited by Harper D, Abedon S, Burrowes B, McConville M: Springer, Cham; 2019.
  16. Sacher JC, Zheng J, McCallin S: Sourcing phages for compassionate use. Microbiology Australia 2019, 40.
  17. Adriaenssens E, Brister JR: How to Name and Classify Your Phage: An Informal Guide. Viruses 2017, 9.
  18. Onsea J, Soentjens P, Djebara S, Merabishvili M, Depypere M, Spriet I, De Munter P, Debaveye Y, Nijs S, Vanderschot P, et al.: Bacteriophage Application for Difficult-to-treat Musculoskeletal Infections: Development of a Standardized Multidisciplinary Treatment Protocol. Viruses 2019, 11.
  19. Pirnay JP, Verbeken G, Ceyssens PJ, Huys I, De Vos D, Ameloot C, Fauconnier A: The Magistral Phage. Viruses 2018, 10.
  20. Gibson SB, Green SI, Liu CG, Salazar KC, Clark JR, Terwilliger AL, Kaplan HB, Maresso AW, Trautner BW, Ramig RF: Constructing and Characterizing Bacteriophage Libraries for Phage Therapy of Human Infections. Frontiers in Microbiology 2019, 10.
  21. Philipson CW, Voegtly LJ, Lueder MR, Long KA, Rice GK, Frey KG, Biswas B, Cer RZ, Hamilton T, Bishop-Lilly KA: Characterizing Phage Genomes for Therapeutic Applications. Viruses 2018, 10.
  22. Matzke LA, Fombonne B, Watson PH, Moore HM: Fundamental Considerations for Biobank Legacy Planning. Biopreserv Biobank 2016, 14:99-106.
  23. Gee S, Oliver R, Corfield J, Georghiou L, Yuille M: Biobank Finances: A Socio-Economic Analysis and Review. Biopreserv Biobank 2015, 13:435-451.

    Please sign in or register for FREE

    If you are a registered user on Microbiology Community, please sign in