the proteolytic enzyme sometimes known as serratiopeptidase? For over 30 years serrapeptase has been
gaining wide acceptance in Europe and Asia as a potent analgesic and
been used to promote wound healing and surgical recovery. Recent Japanese
patents even suggest that oral serrapeptase may help treat or prevent such viral
diseases as AIDS and hepatitis B and C. But perhaps its most spectacular
application is in reversing cardiovascular disease. In fact,
serrapeptase appears so effective in unblocking carotid arteries that one
researcher—Dr. Hans Nieper, the late, eminent internist from Hannover,
Germany—called it a “miracle” enzyme.
this all sound a little too miraculous to be true? Read on. There’s a solid
scientific rationale for each of these heath benefits, and they all have to do
with the fact that serrapeptase is “proteolytic” (literally,
enzymes (also known as proteinases or peptidases) are ubiquitous in nature,
being found in animals, plants, bacteria, and fungi. Human beings produce such
well known peptidases as trypsin and chymotrypsin to help digest our food, but
we also generate countless others to control virtually every regulatory
mechanism in our bodies. For example, various peptidases are involved in
initiating blood clotting (thrombogenesis) and also in dissolving clots
(fibrinolysis); in evoking an immune response and quelling it; and in both
promoting and halting inflammation. The mechanism in each case is the ability of
the enzyme to cut or cleave a protein target into two or more pieces, usually at
very specific cleavage sites. The same mechanism makes it possible for
peptidases to inactivate HIV, the AIDS-associated virus, by pruning the viral
proteins necessary for infectivity.
medical use of enzymes as anti-inflammatory agents goes back many years. In the
early 1950s it was discovered that intravenous trypsin could unexpectedly
relieve the symptoms of many different inflammatory conditions, including
rheumatoid arthritis, ulcerative colitis, and atypical viral pneumonia.
Subsequently intramuscular enzyme injections were found to be beneficial in
counteracting post-surgical swelling (edema), treating thrombophlebitis and
lower back strain, and rapidly healing bruises caused by sports injuries.
that time the mechanism of the anti-inflammatory effect remained obscure. Today
it is believed to involve degradation of inflammatory mediators, suppression of
edema, activation of fibrinolysis, reduction of immune complexes
(antibody-antigen conglomerates), and proteolytic modification of cell-surface
adhesion molecules which guide inflammatory cells to their targets. (Such
adhesion molecules are known to play an important role in the development of
arthritis and other autoimmune diseases.) It’s also thought that the analgesic
effect of proteolytic enzymes is due to their cleavage of bradykinin, a
messenger molecule involved in pain signalling. However, according to
another theory, peptidases such as trypsin may be acting not as
anti-inflammatory agents but rather as accelerants of the inflammatory process,
thereby shortening its duration. Whatever the mechanism, many studies of
proteolytic enzymes over the years have demonstrated their effectiveness in
relieving pain and inflammation independently of steroids or nonsteroidal
anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs).
we don’t need to rely on intramuscular injections any more to enjoy the
benefits of proteolytic enzymes. Around 35 years ago researchers showed that
enterically-coated enzymes such as trypsin, chymotrypsin, or bromelain were
orally active. Oral proteolytic enzymes have been used successfully ever since
for inflammatory conditions. Recently the intestinal absorption of orally
administered serrapeptase has also been demonstrated.16 To achieve an ideal
therapeutic effect, however, it is essential that any enzyme preparation be
properly enterically coated so as to release the enzymes in the intestines
(where they can be absorbed) and not in the stomach (where they can be
proteolytic enzymes in common use today derive from bacteria (serrapeptase grown
from Serratia marcescens cultures), plants (bromelain from pineapple stem and
papain from papaya), and animal sources (trypsin and chymotrypsin from hogs or
cattle). They’re all generally useful, but for many applications serrapeptase
appears to be the most useful of them all. In one study serrapeptase was
compared to trypsin, chymotrypsin, and pronase (another microbial peptidase) in
a rat model of scalding, which is known to induce abnormal activation of
fibrinolysis. Serrapeptase was far more effective than any other enzyme in
repressing fibrinolysis in this model, in agreement with its documented clinical
efficacy as an anti-inflammatory agent.
the way, in case you’ve got a good memory for details, you might have noticed
that a few paragraphs back I said the activation of fibrinolysis, not its
repression, is one of the likely anti-inflammatory mechanisms of serrapeptase.
The truth is that serrapeptase, like other peptidases, can have seemingly
contradictory effects at different times under different circumstances. The
essential point of the study just cited is that serrapeptase and the other
peptidases inhibited abnormal activation of fibrinolysis, and that this was a
sign of their anti-inflammatory activity.
other circumstances serrapeptase is definitely fibrinolytic, i.e., clot-busting,
and it is this property that makes it so useful in treating cardiovascular
disease. According to Dr. Hans Nieper, only three 5 mg tablets of serrapeptase
daily for 12 to 18 months are sufficient to remove fibrous blockages from
constricted coronary arteries, as confirmed in many of his patients by
ultrasound examination. But that’s still not the whole
story—serrapeptase may well offer additional cardiovascular benefits not
considered by Nieper. In particular, researchers have recently proposed that
inflammation contributes to the development of arterial blockage. In one study,
subjects with higher levels of CRP (C-reactive protein, a marker for systemic
inflammation) were found to have a greater risk of future heart attack and
stroke, independently of other risk factors such as smoking, high blood
pressure, or cholesterol levels.18 Subjects with the highest levels of CRP who
also used aspirin, however, showed dramatic decreases in their risk of heart
attack, leading the researchers to speculate that the effectiveness of aspirin
in preventing heart attack is due as much to its anti-inflammatory activity as
to its anticlotting effects.
like aspirin, is both anti-inflammatory and anticlotting; unlike aspirin,
however, serrapeptase can melt through existing fibrous deposits.
Serrapeptase also lacks the serious gastrointestinal side effects associated
with chronic use of NSAIDs such as aspirin. This combination of properties makes
serrapeptase just about the perfect remedy for warding off cardiovascular
disease, better even than the proverbial aspirin a day. It’s beginning to look
more and more as though Dr. Nieper was right—serrapeptase is indeed a
optimal results in unclogging arteries Nieper suggests combining serrapeptase
with other nutritional factors, including bromelain, magnesium orotate,
carnitine, and selenium; see the information packet obtainable from the Brewer
Library for more details. To avoid possible pulmonary and ileal
irritation, Nieper also recommends not exceeding a dose of about three tablets
per day for long-term continuous use.
serrapeptase is a blood-thinning agent, it’s wise to consult your physician if
you’re already taking any form of anticoagulant therapy (or, for that matter,
if you suffer from any serious illness). Despite these cautions, however,
serrapeptase has an excellent tolerability profile in general. The Japanese
company that first developed serrapeptase, recommends up to six 5 mg tablets per
day—two tablets three times a day, between meals—for short-term treatment of
acute inflammation due to surgery, wound healing, sinusitis, cystitis, bronchial
asthma, bronchitis, and breast engorgement in lactating women.
A preliminary trial
in patients with carpal tunnel syndrome.
Panagariya A, Sharma AK
Dept. of Neurology, SMS Medical College and Hospital, Jaipur.
J Assoc Physicians India 1999 Dec;47(12):1170-2
OBJECTIVES: This study was planned to assess the response of serrapeptase
in patients with carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS).
METHODS: Twenty patients with CTS were
evaluated clinically. After baseline electrophysiological studies, these
patients were given serrapetase10 mg twice daily with initial short
course of nimesulide. Clinical and electrophysiological reassessment was done
after 6 weeks.
RESULTS: Mean age was 43.9 years with
male to female ratio of 1:2.33. Sixty five percent cases showed significant
clinical improvement which was supported by significant improvement in
electrophysiological parameters. Recurrence was reported in four cases. No
significant side effect was observed.
CONCLUSIONS: serrapeptase therapy
may proved to be a useful alternative mode of conservative treatment. Larger
study may be further helpful to establish the role of serrapeptase in CTS.
a new treatment strategy for prosthetic infections?
by Selan L, Berlutti F, Passariello C, Comodi-Ballanti MR, Thaller MC
Istituto di Microbiologia, Facolta di Farmacia,
Universita La Sapienza, Rome,
Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1993 Dec;37(12):2618-21
Among the different mechanisms of bacterial resistance to antimicrobial agents
that have been studied, biofilm formation is one of the most widespread. This
mechanism is frequently the cause of failure in the treatment of prosthetic
device infections, and several attempts have been made to develop molecules and
protocols that are able to inhibit biofilm-embedded bacteria. We present data
suggesting the possibility that proteolytic enzymes could significantly enhance
the activities of antibiotics against biofilms. Antibiotic susceptibility tests
on both planktonic and sessile cultures, studies on the dynamics of colonization
of 10 biofilm-forming isolates, and then bioluminescence and scanning electron
microscopy under seven different experimental conditions showed that serrapetase
greatly enhances the activity of ofloxacin on sessile cultures and can inhibit
A New Method for Evaluating
Mucolytic Expectorant Activity and its Application
II. Application to two proteolytic
enzymes, serrapeptase and seaprose*
By Y. Kase, H. Seo, Y. Oyama, M. Sakata, K. Tomoda,
K. Takahama, T. Hitoshi, Y. Okano, and T. Miyata
Arzneim.-Forsch. / Drug Res. 32 (1),
Department of Chemico-Pharmacology. Faculty of
Pharmaceutical Sciences, Kumamoto
University, Kumamoto (Japan)
Summary: Using our new method described in a preceding paper, in vivo effects of two proteolytic enzymes such as serrapeptase and seaprose (SAP) on sputa collected from bronchitis rabbits were examined.
Serrapeptase (20 mg/kg) and SAP (30 mg/kg) significantly reduced the viscosity of sputum (P < 0.05) at the 1-3-h periods and the 4-6-h periods, respectively, after intraduodenal administration. 50 mg/kg of
serrapeptase also significantly decreased not only viscosity (P < 0.001) but also amount of freeze-dried substance (P < 0.05) of sputum at the 1-3-h periods, but SAP did not affect the amount of dried substance. Both enzymes significantly increased the volume of sputum, probably as the result of liquefaction. Thus, mucolytic expectorant activity of both enzymes can be demonstrated first by the reduction in viscosity and next by the increase in volume of sputa. However, the decrease in amount of freeze-dried substance is not always in accord with the reduction in viscosity.
In this previous paper ,
we reported a new method which seems to be applicable to examine the in vivo
effect of mucolytic expectorants. By the use of this method, the expectorant
effect of a drug can be evaluated from the changes in both quantity and quality
of sputa, which were quantitatively collected from
the rabbits suffering from subacute bronchitis caused by long-term exposure to
SO2 gas. The purpose of the present study is to ascertain whether this method is
well applicable to the evaluation of mucolytic expectorant effect of the
reference drugs as was expected, whose clinical efficacy was already well
established. Two proteolytic enzymes, serrapeptase and seaprose, were chosen for
such a purpose. Though their chemical properties differ, both enzymes have so
far been used as the effective mucolytics in the
treatment of various disorders related to viscous sputum or pus, and their
efficacies have been war-ranted to be more potent and reliable than those of a-chymotrypsin and others. Therefore, they have widely been used not only in Japan but also in. some other countries. Nevertheless, the pharmacological evidence which sub-stantiates their clinical efficacies, in particular, mucolytic expectorant effect, is insufficient, though they exhibit potent mucolytic activity in in vitro experiments [2, 3]. Bromhexine, a representative of the expectorants, was used as a control drug, because its mechanism of action is quite different from that of proteolytic enzyme, that is, it does not exhibit in vitro mucolytic activity and its main effect is known only by the increase in the volume of respiratory tract fluid (RTF) when it was examined by Perry and Boyd's method [4-7] using normal healthy rabbits. Further pharmacological study, for instance, the acting mechanism of mucolytic expectorant effect of intraduodenally administered enzymes will be described in the subsequent paper.
2. Materials and methods
Animals and drugs
Male rabbits of New Zealand White-strain, weighing 1.8 to 2.5 kg, were used. Serrapeptase (Danzen*, hereafter abbreviated as SER), a proteolytic enzyme (endopeptidase) prepared from the culture broth of. genus Serratia sp. E-15 (one of enteric bacilli in silkworm) which comes as grayish powder, was provided
Evaluation of Serratia Peptidase in Acute or Chronic Inflammation of Otorhinolaryngology Pathology: a Multicentre, Double-blind, Randomized Trial versus Placebo
A. Mazzone1, M. Catalan2, M. Costanzo3, A. Drusian4,
A. Mandol5, S. Russo6, E. Guarini7 and G. Vesperini8
1Institute of Clinical Otorhinolaryngology, University of Naples, Naples, Italy;
2Ear, Nose and Throat Department, 'Gradenigo' Hospital, Turin, Italy;
3Ear, Nose and Throat Department, 'Villa Sofia' Hospital, Palermo, Italy;
4Ear Nose and Throat Department, Treviso Regional Hospital, Treviso, Italy;
5Ear, Nose and Throat Department, 'E. Fornaroli' Hospital, Magenta, Italy;
6Ear, Nose and Throat Department, Lucca Hospital, Lucca, Italy;
7Ear, Nose and Throat Department, Civil Hospital, Lecce, Italy;
8Ear, Nose and Throat Department, 'Madonna del Soccorso' Hospital, San Benedetto del Tronto, Italy
The efficacy and tolerability of Serratia peptidase were evaluated in a multi-centre, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of 193 subjects suffering from acute or chronic ear, nose or throat disorders. Treatment lasted 7 - 8 days, with the drug or placebo being administered at a rate of two tablets three times a day. After 3-4 days' treatment, significant symptom regression was observed in peptidase-treated patients. There was also a significant reduction in symptoms after 7 -8 days for patients in both treatment groups but the response was more marked in those patients receiving the active drug. Statistical comparison between the two groups confirmed the greater efficacy and rapid action of the peptidase against all the symptoms examined at both stages. Tolerance was found to be very good and similar for both groups. It is concluded that Serratia peptidase has anti-inflapimatory, anti-edemic and fibrinolytic activity and acts rapidly on localized inflammation.
Address for correspondence: A. Mazzone, MD, Institute of Clinical Otorhinolaryngology, University of Naples, Via Pansini 5, 80131 Naples, Italy.
The use of enzymes with fibrinolytic, I proteolytic and anti-edemic activities has gained increasing support in recent years for the treatment of inflammatory ear, nose and throat (ENT) conditions1. Included among these enzymes is the Serratia peptidase (Danzen® ), a protease obtained from non-pathogenic enterobacteria of the genus Serratia. This proteolytic enzyme, which is available in tablet form to enable it to be absorbed from the intestinal lumen, has been shown lo induce intense fibrinolytic. anti-inflammatory, and anti-edemic activity in a number of tissues and results suggest that its anti-inflammatory activity may be of particular use for the treatment of localized or 'closed' forms of inflammation, such as those frequently found in ENT pathologies.' ^ Another important feature of Serratia peptidase is its effect on pain, the enzyme acting by inhibiting the release of pain-inducing amines, such as bradykinin, from inflammed tissue.1.7
This peptidase induces fragmentation offibrinose aggregates and reduces
the viscosity of exudates,"^ thus facilitating
the drainage of these products of the inflammatory response and thereby
promoting the tissue repair process, and clinical trials have confirmed that the
use of Serratia peptidase resulted in fast resolution of the inflammatory
process." ~ '° The aim of the present
placebo-controlled multicentre study was to evaluate the efficacy and
tolerability of the Serratia peptidase in the treatment of ENT
who were recruited from ENT clinics throughout Italy, were all suffering from
inherent acute or chronic inflammatory conditions. Any patients with serious
concomitant conditions, such as severe renal and/or hepatic impairments, or who
required additional drugs were excluded from the tnal, as this could interfere
with evaluation of the parameters under examination, and the use of steroids,
non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and/or anti-inflammatory/analgesic agents
was prohibited. Antibiotics were permitted when deemed necessary.
tablets containing 5 mg Serratia peptidase or a placebo were provided in
blister packs and patients were randomly assigned to receive two tablets of
either drug, which they were instructed to take three times daily after meals
for 7 -8 days.
Clinical signs and symptoms were assessed on days 0, 3-4 and 7-8 of treatment on
a scale of O-3 (0, absence of the symptoms: 3, maximum severity). Clinical
parameters recorded were as follows: pain; quantity of secretion; difficulty in
swallowing; nasal obstruction; anosmia; and body temperature. The appearance of
the secretion was also recorded on a scale ofO-3 (0, normal; I, mucoid; 2,
mucopurulent: 3, purulent). All evaluations were performed by an ENT specialist
unaware of the treatment given.
Tolerability of Serralia peptidase was evaluated on the basis of the
presence, absence or severity of side-effects, recorded on the patients'
All data were analysed by the most appropriate statistical tests (^-test and
total of 193 subjects (96 males, 97 females), aged between 12 and 77 years (mean
± SD 38 ± 15.7 years), with acute or
chronic ENT pathologies were recruited to the trial. Of these 193 cases, 97 (43
males, 54 females; mean ± SD 37.3 ± 15.2 years) were placed in group A and 96
The treatment of
breast engorgement with Serrapeptase (Danzen)
a randomised double-blind controlled trial.
Kee WH, Tan SL, Lee V, Salmon YM.
Singapore Med J 1989 Feb;30(1):48-54
We evaluated an anti-inflammatory enzyme drug Danzen (Serrapeptase: Takeda Chemical Industries, Ltd.) on 70 patients complaining of breast engorgement. These patients were randomly divided into 2 groups, a treatment group and a placebo group. A single observer, unaware of the group the patients were in, assessed the severity of each of the symptoms and signs of breast engorgement before treatment was commenced, and daily for 3 days, during which therapy was administered. Danzen
(Serrapeptase) was noted to be superior to placebo for improvement of breast pain, breast swelling and induration and while 85.7% of the patients receiving Danzen
(Serrapeptase) had "Moderate to Marked" improvement, only 60.0% of the patients receiving placebo had a similar degree of improvement. "Marked" improvement was found in 22.9% of the treatment group and 2.9% of the placebo group. These differences were statistically significant (P less than 0.05). No adverse reactions were reported with the use of Danzen
(Serrapeptase) is a safe and effective method for the treatment of breast engorgement.
A multi-centre, double-blind study of serrapeptase versus placebo in post-antrotomy buccal swelling.
Tachibana M, Mizukoshi O, Harada Y, Kawamoto K, Nakai Y.
A multi-centre, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial was carried out to investigate the clinical efficacy of the anti-inflammatory enzyme
serrapeptase in a total of 174 patients who underwent Caldwell-Luc antrotomy for chronic emphysema. Eighty-eight patients received 10 mg serrapeptase 3 times on the day before operation, once on the night of the operation and 3 times daily for 5 days after operation; the other 86 received placebo. Changes in buccal swelling after operation were observed as a parameter of the response to treatment. The degree of swelling in the serrapeptase-treated patients was significantly less than that in the placebo-treated patients at every point of observation after operation up to the 5th day (p less than 0.01 to p less than 0.05). Maximal swelling throughout all the post-operative points of observation was also significantly smaller in size in the serrapeptase-treated group than in the
placebo-treated group. No side-effects were reported.