An independent peptide reference — no sellers, every claim sourced

Bronchogen

Also known as AEDL peptide, Ala-Glu-Asp-Leu, Ala-Asp-Glu-Leu (as written in the indexed literature), Bronchogen tetrapeptide

Tetrapeptide from the Russian bioregulator programme, studied in rat lung models with no human evidence.

preclinical Recovery & tissue research chemical

At a glance

Category
Recovery & tissue
Status
research chemical
Route
In the published rat work: parenteral administration over about a month. In grey-market use: subcutaneous or intramuscular injection; the bioregulator product line also uses oral capsules.
Half-life
No published pharmacokinetics in any species. A tetrapeptide with free termini and no protease-resistant modification; plasma survival is presumably minutes. All circulating half-life figures are unsourced.
Onset
No validated onset time; there are no controlled human data on the time course of any effect
Molecular weight
446.5 g/mol
Sequence
The indexed literature and the vendor market disagree. The 2011 Bulletin of Experimental Biology and Medicine paper from the originating group titles the compound 'Ala-Asp-Glu-Leu'; vendors and secondary sources uniformly write 'Ala-Glu-Asp-Leu' (AEDL). The amino acid composition is the same and the mass is unaffected, but the residue order differs, and no source resolves which is correct. That an unresolved sequence ambiguity persists for a marketed compound is itself informative.

Synthetic Bronchogen is not a registered medicine in the EU or US. It belongs to the Khavinson series from the St Petersburg Institute of Bioregulation and Gerontology, whose capsule products are registered in Russia as food supplements (BAD) under a notification regime that involves no efficacy assessment - which is not approval as a medicine. PeptideX has not been able to open the Russian register from outside Russia to confirm this, so the registration should be read as an unverified claim rather than an established fact. Outside Russia it is sold exclusively as a 'research chemical'.

Doping status: Not listed by name; as a non-approved substance it falls under S0 and is therefore prohibited at all times

Checked against the WADA 2026 Prohibited List. For a specific product and country, Global DRO is the lookup athletes are expected to use — the List names substances, not brand names.

This is a short entry. There is little or no published research on this compound, so there is correspondingly little to report. Empty dosing or reconstitution sections mean no credible figures exist — not that they were left out.

Mechanism of action

Bronchogen is the respiratory member of the Khavinson short peptide series, said to have been derived from polypeptide fractions of bronchial mucosa. The proposed mechanism is the programme's standard one: the tetrapeptide is claimed to enter the nucleus of bronchial epithelial cells, interact with DNA and chromatin, and shift expression of genes governing epithelial repair, ciliated cell differentiation and mucus production.

The group's own biophysical data undercut the sequence-specific reading of this. Using differential scanning microcalorimetry, Monaselidze, Khavinson and colleagues (2011) reported that the peptide raises the DNA melting temperature by around 3.1 degrees Celsius at particular molar ratios - that is, it stabilises DNA - but stated that the binding involved both strands and was non-specific with respect to base pair composition 1. Non-specific stabilisation of the double helix is what a small charged molecule does; it is not gene-selective regulation, and it does not support the claim that this peptide directs a particular transcriptional programme in a particular organ. This should be labelled a hypothesis, not a mechanism.

The tissue-specificity premise - that a peptide sourced from bronchial mucosa acts selectively on bronchial mucosa - is the least substantiated assumption of the entire programme, and no independent work supports it for AEDL.

What the research shows

Almost nothing is known. The indexed evidence for Bronchogen consists of a small number of papers from the originating group: one biophysical DNA-binding study, one nuclear-penetration study, and rat models of NO2-induced obstructive lung pathology. There is no human study of any kind, and no independent replication by any group outside the Khavinson circle. Nothing supports using this compound for any respiratory condition in a person.

Research in humans

No published human study - not a trial, not a case series, not an open-label report. Claims made for asthma, COPD, smoking-related lung damage or recovery from respiratory infection have no human data behind them at all.

Animal and lab research

The main in vivo work is Kuzubova et al. (Bulletin of Experimental Biology and Medicine, 2015), in which rats were given chronic obstructive lung pathology by 60 days of intermittent NO2 exposure and then treated with the tetrapeptide for one month 2. The authors reported reversal of goblet cell hyperplasia, squamous metaplasia, lymphocytic infiltration and emphysematous change, restoration of ciliated cells, increased secretory IgA and reduced neutrophilic inflammation markers 2. A related Russian-language report from the same group in 2017 describes anti-inflammatory and regenerative effects in the same model. Supporting in vitro work covers penetration of fluorescence-labelled short peptides into HeLa nuclei and organotypic tissue culture from young and old rats.

Caveats. All of it is one group. There is no independent replication, no protocol registration, no described blinding of the histological assessment - which matters a great deal when the primary outcomes are subjective morphological scores - and the group sizes are not large. A toxicant-exposure model in rats (NO2 for 60 days, then treatment) models neither human COPD nor asthma with any fidelity; recovery after withdrawal of the toxicant is expected in the control condition too, and the relevant question is the size of the difference, which is hard to assess from the available reporting. Publication is in Bulletin of Experimental Biology and Medicine and Rossiiskii Fiziologicheskii Zhurnal, venues with limited external scrutiny, and part of the work is available only in Russian. The unresolved disagreement about the peptide's own sequence adds a further reason for caution about what is actually being sold and studied.

What it is used for

  • Marketed for asthma, COPD, chronic bronchitis, smoking-related lung damage and post-infection respiratory recovery - none of which has any human evidence
  • Studied by the originating group in a rat NO2-exposure model of obstructive lung pathology 23
  • Used as a test peptide in DNA thermostability 1 and nuclear-penetration experiments 4
  • Self-administered on the grey market in courses, without a validated indication, dose or route

Dosing

  • There is no validated dose. No dose-finding study, no maximum tolerated dose, no pharmacokinetics in any species and no dose-response curve exist.
  • The rat studies dosed parenterally for one month after 60 days of NO2 exposure 2 and do not provide a basis for a human dose in the absence of any pharmacokinetic bridge.
  • The figures circulating in user protocols - typically a 20 mg vial spread over a 10 to 20 day course - reflect the vial size the peptide is sold in, not a research finding.
  • Leaving this dosing field empty is the accurate answer. The vendor 'course' convention that circulates is recorded in the protocol section below, explicitly as vendor labelling with no published basis rather than as a studied dose.

These figures describe what the literature and published protocols report. They are not advice and not a dosing instruction.

Protocols

Vendor 'course' convention (user-reported)

user protocol — not validated

Source: Vendor product labelling and forum posts; no published basis

This is not a validated schedule. It is a pattern that circulates among users and sellers, reproduced because it is what people actually follow — not because it has been tested. No trial established these doses, this interval or this duration, and nobody is checking what is in the vial. Treat every number below as an assertion, not a finding.

Injectable courseroughly a 20 mg vial worked through over a 10 to 20 day course
Capsule form (bioregulator line)1 to 3 capsules daily for about 10 to 30 days
Repetitionthe course repeated 2 to 3 times a year in some vendor instructions

These figures come from vendor labelling and forum posts, not from any study. The 10-to-20-day course length and the amount per course simply track the vial size the peptide is sold in and the generic 'course' format the whole Khavinson product line is marketed under; neither has a pharmacokinetic or clinical basis. No dose-finding study, no maximum tolerated dose and no pharmacokinetics exist in any species, so nothing anchors these numbers to an effect. The injectable and capsule conventions cannot be reconciled with each other because no absorption data exist for either route.

Schedules are reproduced as their source states them. Units, IU and milligrams explains why the figures are not interchangeable between products.

Safety

Side effects

  • Not documented, because no systematic safety research exists in humans. The absence of a side effect profile reflects a lack of research, not demonstrated safety
  • No formal toxicology programme, carcinogenicity study or reproductive toxicity study has been carried out
  • Reported at user level, uncontrolled and unverifiable: injection site reactions, transient headache, fatigue

Do not use if

  • Asthma, COPD or any other respiratory disease being managed with proven therapy - the serious risk here is substitution. Delaying or replacing inhaled corticosteroids, bronchodilators or antibiotics with an unstudied peptide is the realistic route to harm, and it is a foreseeable one given how this compound is marketed
  • Active or past malignancy - the claimed mechanism involves epithelial proliferation and repair, and the rat work reports restoration of ciliated cells and reversal of goblet cell hyperplasia and squamous metaplasia 2. Lung epithelium in smokers is precisely the tissue where stimulating proliferation is least advisable, and this has never been studied
  • Pregnancy and breastfeeding - no data
  • Children and adolescents - no data
  • Hypersensitivity to the peptide or, for injectable use, to benzyl alcohol in bacteriostatic diluent

Interactions

Not studied. No interaction data exist with inhaled or systemic corticosteroids, bronchodilators, antibiotics or any other medication.

Sources