American Society of Hirudotherapy

Neutrophil elastase and acute lung injury: prospects for sivelestat and other neutrophil elastase inhibitors as therapeutics

Review published in Crit Care Med (2002)

Last Updated: June 18, 2026Reviewed by: ASH Editorial Board
Research article — evidence reviewArticle reference
Evidence: Research reportDrug DevelopmentSalivary PharmacologyZeiher BG et al. · Critical care medicine, 2002

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To review the evidence and rationale that suggest that neutrophil elastase (NE) may contribute to the development of acute lung injury (ALI) and the acute respiratory distress syndrome. To review selected preliminary data regarding the effectiveness of NE inhibition in animals, in in vitro models, and in patients with ALI. DATA SOURCES: The published literature and observations provided by Ono Pharmaceutical and Eli Lilly investigators and their colleagues. DATA SUMMARY: Taken en toto, the data suggest that NE could contribute to ALI and endothelial cell injury that is relevant to ALI. Moreover, the toxic effects of NE are greatly enhanced by increased oxidative stress, which commonly occurs in patients with ALI. In addition to neutrophils, xanthine oxidase, a constituent of endothelial cells, is a potential source of oxidative stress in ALI; xanthine oxidase-derived oxidants enhance NE toxicity in in vivo, isolated lung, and in vitro endothelial cell test systems. Not surprisingly, endogenous nonoxidatively sensitive NE inhibitors (e.g., eglin C) are more effective in combating the detrimental effects of NE than oxidatively sensitive NE inhibitors (e.g., alpha-1-proteinase inhibitor). In addition, a synthetic NE inhibitor, sivelestat (ONO-5046 and LY544349), is effective in reducing measures of inflammation and injury in multiple animal models of ALI. In a trial of ALI patients with systemic inflammatory response syndrome, conducted in Japan by Ono Pharmaceutical scientists, sivelestat treatment improved the investigator assessment of global improvement and the percentages of patients who were removed from ventilators and transferred out of the intensive care unit. CONCLUSIONS: Further study of the role of NE inhibition as a treatment for ALI is warranted. Additional clinical and preclinical studies with sivelestat and various other NE inhibitors should not only clarify the clinical potential of this intervention strategy, but also better define the activities of NE in inflammatory disorders such as ALI and multiple organ failure.

Abstract sourced from PubMed (NCBI) for the cited record. See the original publication for the authoritative version.

Publication typeJournal Article
Indexed MeSH termsAnimalsEndothelium, VascularGlycineHumansLeukocyte ElastaseOxidative StressRespiratory Distress SyndromeSerine Proteinase InhibitorsSulfonamidesXanthine Oxidase

Summary

Review of neutrophil elastase inhibitors as ALI/ARDS therapeutics positioning eglin C from H. medicinalis as more effective non-oxidatively-sensitive NE inhibitor compared to alpha-1-proteinase inhibitor.

Why This Matters for Hirudotherapy

This article reviews evidence that neutrophil elastase (NE) contributes to acute lung injury (ALI) and evaluates NE inhibition as a therapeutic strategy, discussing the synthetic inhibitor sivelestat and noting that endogenous, non-oxidatively sensitive NE inhibitors such as eglin C are more effective against NE toxicity than oxidatively sensitive inhibitors. The abstract does not mention leeches, hirudotherapy, or any leech origin for eglin C. No defensible connection to ASH's domain can be drawn from this abstract alone. Caveat: literature review; eglin C is mentioned only as a reference comparator, with no leech association stated.

Citation

Neutrophil elastase and acute lung injury: prospects for sivelestat and other neutrophil elastase inhibitors as therapeutics.

Zeiher BG et al. · Critical care medicine, 2002

Added to ASH library: May 27, 2026 · Site last updated: June 18, 2026

This website provides educational information and does not constitute medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment recommendations. Medicinal leech therapy carries clinically meaningful risks and should be performed only by qualified clinicians under institutionally approved protocols. FDA 510(k) clearance for medicinal leeches is limited to specific indications; investigational and off-label discussions are labeled accordingly. For patient-specific guidance, consult a qualified healthcare provider.