Immune & inflammation
Bronchogen
A Khavinson-series tetrapeptide studied in a rat model of lung damage from nitrogen dioxide; no human study. Its reported sequence is inconsistent across sources.
- How settled this rating is:
- very-low confidence in the current evidence rating
- Routes studied:
- Not established · Nasal, Subcutaneous injection (marketed but never approved)
- Also known as:
- AEDL, Ala-Glu-Asp-Leu
- Last reviewed:
- 2026-09-26
Jump to section
Evidence passport
Bronchogen
A one-screen evidence identity for this compound. These fields describe research maturity, confidence and legal status. They are not a safety guarantee, efficacy percentage or recommendation.
- Evidence level
- L1Theory only
- Confidence
- Very low confidence in rating
- Regulatory status
- Not approved for this use
- Development status
- Preclinical
Evidence strength
Higher = more and better-quality human evidence. It does not mean the effect is bigger or that the compound works for you.
Higher = more mature, better-documented human safety data. It does not mean the compound is safer than one with a lower number.
The 0-100 values rate the strength and maturity of evidence, not how effective or safe the compound is.
- Evidence base
- Mostly animal and laboratory research
- Furthest established stage
- Not established
- Human research maturity
- Preclinical (rat NO₂ lung model)
- Source curation
- Sources fully curated
Routes recorded
Most of this evidence comes from animals and cells
Overview
Higher = more and better-quality human evidence. It does not mean the effect is bigger or that the compound works for you.
Higher = more animal, tissue or cell research. Preclinical results are a starting point, not proof of a human benefit.
Higher = more mature, better-documented human safety data. It does not mean the compound is safer than one with a lower number.
How to read these scores
Every number here rates the evidence, not the compound. They are editorial 0-100 strength ratings, not percentages, and not a rating out of five stars.
- Human efficacy evidence strength — Higher = more and better-quality human evidence. It does not mean the effect is bigger or that the compound works for you.
- Preclinical evidence strength — Higher = more animal, tissue or cell research. Preclinical results are a starting point, not proof of a human benefit.
- Human safety evidence strength — Higher = more mature, better-documented human safety data. It does not mean the compound is safer than one with a lower number. A score of 80 does not mean “80% safe”.
- Evidence level (L0-L5) — the strongest type of study behind the compound, from anecdote (L0) to large replicated human trials (L5). It is a description of the study evidence, not a quality, safety or recommendation rating.
- Confidence — how likely we think it is that this rating changes as new research lands. Low confidence means the picture is unsettled, not that the compound is bad.
None of these ratings is medical advice, a safety guarantee, or a recommendation to use anything. How we grade evidence.
How far human research has progressed: Preclinical (rat NO₂ lung model)
Routes & formulations
Marketed / research routes — never approved
Only rat studies were identified. No human route has been studied.
Route availability is not evidence of efficacy, and evidence from one route does not transfer to another. The Registry never provides dosing or sourcing information.
Peptide lifecycle
Discovery
Preclinical
Phase I
Phase II
Phase III
Approved
What it is
IDENTITY CONFLICT: a 2011 primary paper names Bronchogen as Ala-Glu-Asp-Leu (AEDL), but Ala-Asp-Glu-Leu (ADEL) also circulates. These are different molecules. A product labelled with one order must never be assumed to be interchangeable with the other, and the rat findings below cannot be attributed to either product label without checking identity.
What people claim
- Lung repair
- COPD support
- Bronchial protection
What the evidence actually says
Two rat studies from the same Russian pulmonology group used 60 days of intermittent nitrogen dioxide exposure to model chronic obstructive lung disease, then reported improved bronchial epithelium structure and less neutrophilic inflammation after Bronchogen. This is an animal model only; no human COPD study was identified.
Related evidence
Useful next reads based on this compound — not recommendations.
- Related compound
KPV evidence profile
A three-amino-acid fragment of alpha-MSH marketed for gut healing and inflammation, with no human clinical studies identified by the FDA.
- Compare
Compare Bronchogen vs KPV evidence
Same questions, same fields, side by side — including how much human evidence exists.
- Context
Research Desk
How to read animal, early-phase and controlled human studies without over-reading them.
- Context
Safety Centre
What approved, investigational and unapproved actually mean for documented human safety.
Human evidence
- No human study of Bronchogen was identified.
Preclinical evidence
- Rat NO₂ COPD model: reported reversal of epithelial remodelling and increased secretory IgA (Kuzubova et al., Bull Exp Biol Med 2015, PMID 26468022).
- Rat NO₂ COPD model: reduced neutrophilic inflammation, increased secretory IgA and surfactant protein B (Titova et al., Ross Fiziol Zh 2017, PMID 30199201, Russian).
- Sequence identification as Ala-Glu-Asp-Leu in a DNA-binding / HeLa-cell study (PMID 22117547).
- Both rat studies come from one research group; independent replication was not identified.
Animal and cell findings are Level 1–2 evidence.
Mechanism and pathways
- Proposed restoration of bronchial epithelial function; rat data only. Proposed DNA-binding activity is in vitro.
Safety and unknowns
- No human safety data identified.
- Identity inconsistency (AEDL vs ADEL) is itself a product-safety concern.
- Material sold online is unregulated: identity, purity, sterility and labelled quantity are separate questions from what the published molecule does.
Cancer relevance
This section covers questions raised by how the compound works in the body, plus anything regulators and trial teams keep an eye on. It is not a statement that this compound causes cancer — for most compounds here, no human data exist in either direction.
No established human signal
Regulatory status
Regulatory decisions apply to specific jurisdictions, products, formulations and indications. An approval elsewhere is not automatically an approval in your country.
Check the regulatory note and linked primary sources for jurisdiction-specific details.
Not an approved medicine in any major jurisdiction. Sale as a 'research chemical' is a legal and supply-chain statement, not evidence of benefit or harm.
Evidence grade
Mechanistic rationale or early development without qualifying compound-specific outcome evidence. A registered trial is not a result.
What would change our rating?
- Resolution of the AEDL/ADEL identity conflict in a primary source.
- Independent replication, then a registered human study.
References and sources
Source transparency
A provenance snapshot of this profile. Counts show what kinds of sources are cited, not how much scientific weight each source deserves.
- Last editorial review
- 2026-09-26
- Recently reviewed · 20 days ago
- Linked curated sources
- 3
- Sources still pending
- 0
- External specialist reviews
- 0
- None recorded for this profile
Review provenance
Registry editorial review: Colin Jackson-White, creator and editor, who is not a doctor or clinician. External specialist review is credited only when a named reviewer has completed a review of this exact profile.
Literature-discovery and AI tools may help locate or challenge candidate evidence, but they are not counted as evidence sources here. Registry judgements are tied to the underlying papers, trial records, regulator documents and official study records.
- Peer-reviewedKuzubova et al. Modulating effect of peptide therapy on the morphofunctional state of bronchial epithelium in rats with obstructive lung pathology. Bull Exp Biol Med 2015 (PMID 26468022)PMID: 26468022
- Peer-reviewedTitova et al. Anti-inflammatory and regenerative effect of peptide therapy in the model of obstructive lung pathology. Ross Fiziol Zh 2017 (PMID 30199201, Russian)PMID: 30199201
- Peer-reviewedPenetration of short fluorescence-labeled peptides into the nucleus in HeLa cells and specific interaction with deoxyribooligonucleotides and DNA. 2011 (PMID 22117547)PMID: 22117547
Source hierarchy: regulatory documents and trial registries first, peer-reviewed work next, sponsor material flagged as non-independent. We never use supplier or clinic marketing as evidence, and where a verified source has not yet been curated we say so rather than inventing one.
Evidence change history
These entries record changes to our assessment of the published evidence — not changes to the compound itself.
No recorded changes yet. Baseline position set on 2026-09-26.