Patch Testing with Propolis of Different Geographical Origins in a Baseline Series

Authors

  • Gunnar S. A. Nyman Department of Dermatology and Venereology, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gröna stråket 16, SE-413 46 Göteborg, Sweden
  • Ana Maria Giménez‐Arnau
  • Jurate Grigaitiene
  • Laura Malinauskiene
  • Evy Paulsen
  • Lina Hagvall

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.2340/actadv.v101.423

Keywords:

propolis, allergic contact dermatitis, patch test, cross-reaction, colophonium, balsam of Peru

Abstract

The chemical composition of propolis varies with geographical origin; however, it is not known whether this affects the frequency of contact allergy to propolis. In order to study the frequency of contact allergy to propolis of different geographical origins and concomitant reactions, 1,470 consecutive patients with dermatitis from Denmark, Lithuania and Spain were patch tested with propolis from China, Lithuania, North America and Sweden, and with a baseline series. Patch test reactions to any type of propolis ranged from 1.3% to 5.8%. There were no statistically significant differences in the frequency of positive reactions between the 4 types of propolis in the respective countries. Testing with a single commercially available type of propolis detects only approximately half of propolis-allergic patients. In patients allergic to propolis, concomitant reactions to Myroxylon pereirae resin, colophonium and Fragrance mix I were common, ranging from 12.5% to 50.0%.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Malhotra S DS, Singal A, Kaur M. To study the incidence of contact hypersensitivity to commonly used topical antibacterials. Internet J Dermatol 2010; 8: 1-7.

https://doi.org/10.5580/2743 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5580/2743

Wolf R, Wolf D, Tüzün B, Tüzün Y. Cosmetics and contact dermatitis. Dermatol Ther 2001; 14: 181-187.

https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1529-8019.2001.01025.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1529-8019.2001.01025.x

Rastogi S, Patel KR, Singam V, Silverberg JI. Allergic contact dermatitis to personal care products and topical medications in adults with atopic dermatitis. J Am Acad Dermatol 2018; 79: 1028-1033.e6.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaad.2018.07.017 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaad.2018.07.017

Corazza M, Borghi A, Lauriola MM, Virgili A. Use of topical herbal remedies and cosmetics: a questionnaire-based investigation in dermatology out-patients. J Eur Acad Dermatol 2009; 23: 1298-1303.

https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-3083.2009.03314.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-3083.2009.03314.x

AC dG. Propolis: a review of properties, applications, chemical composition, contact allergy, and other adverse effects. Dermatitis 2013; 24: 263-284.

https://doi.org/10.1097/DER.0000000000000011 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/DER.0000000000000011

Walgrave S.E. WEM, Glesne L.A. Allergic contact dermatitis from propolis. Dermatitis 2005; 16: 209-215.

https://doi.org/10.1097/01206501-200512000-00004 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/01206501-200512000-00004

Hausen BM, Evers P, Stüwe HT, König WA, Wollenweber E. Propolis allergy (IV) Studies with further sensitizers from propolis and constituents common to propolis, poplar buds and balsam of Peru. Contact Dermatitis 1992; 26: 34-44.

https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0536.1992.tb00865.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0536.1992.tb00865.x

Hausen BM. Evaluation of the main contact allergens in propolis (1995-2005). Dermatitis 2005; 16: 127-129.

https://doi.org/10.1097/01206501-200509000-00007 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/01206501-200509000-00007

Rudzki E, Grzywa Z. Dermatitis from propolis. Contact Dermatitis 1983; 9: 40-45.

https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0536.1983.tb04624.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0536.1983.tb04624.x

Nyman G, Wagner S, Prystupa-Chalkidis K, Ryberg K, Hagvall L. Contact allergy in western Sweden to propolis of four different origins. Acta Derm Venereol 2020; 100: adv00256.

https://doi.org/10.2340/00015555-3615 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2340/00015555-3615

Johansen JD, Aalto-Korte K, Agner T, Andersen KE, Bircher A, Bruze M, et al. European Society of Contact Dermatitis guideline for diagnostic patch testing - recommendations on best practice. Contact Dermatitis 2015; 73: 195-221.

https://doi.org/10.1111/cod.12432 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/cod.12432

Bruze M. Thoughts on how to improve the quality of multicentre patch test studies. Contact Dermatitis 2016; 74: 168-174.

https://doi.org/10.1111/cod.12507 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/cod.12507

Uter W, Amario-Hita JC, Balato A, Ballmer-Weber B, Bauer A, Fortina AB, et al. European Surveillance System on Contact Allergies (ESSCA): results with the European baseline series, 2013/14. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol 2017; 31: 1516-1525.

https://doi.org/10.1111/jdv.14423 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jdv.14423

Uter W, Spiewak R, Cooper SM, Wilkinson M, Sánchez Pérez J, Schnuch A, et al. Contact allergy to ingredients of topical medications: results of the European Surveillance System on Contact Allergies (ESSCA), 2009-2012. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Safety 2016; 25: 1305-1312.

https://doi.org/10.1002/pds.4064 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/pds.4064

Giusti F, Miglietta R, Pepe P, Seidenari S. Sensitization to propolis in 1255 children undergoing patch testing. Contact Dermatitis 2004; 51: 255-258.

https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0105-1873.2004.00455.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0105-1873.2004.00455.x

Pietowska J CE, Spiewak R. The most frequent contact sensitizers and atopic diseases among consecutive patients of a Polish test clinic. Allergy 2008; 63: 320.

Bunney MH. Contact dermatitis in beekeepees due to propolis (bee glue). Br J Dermatol 1968; 80: 17-23.

https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2133.1968.tb11900.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2133.1968.tb11900.x

Barile M, Cozzani E, Anonide A, Usiglio D, Burroni A, Guarrera M. Is contact allergy rare in psoriatics? Contact Dermatitis 1996; 35: 113-114.

https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0536.1996.tb02309.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0536.1996.tb02309.x

Svedman C, Isaksson M, Björk J, Mowitz M, Bruze M. 'Calibration' of our patch test reading technique is necessary. Contact Dermatitis 2012; 66: 180-187.

https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0536.2011.02044.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0536.2011.02044.x

Brasch J, Schnuch A, Geier J, Aberer W, Uter W. Iodopropynylbutyl carbamate 0.2% is suggested for patch testing of patients with eczema possibly related to preservatives. Br J Dermatol 2004; 151: 608-615.

https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2133.2004.06141.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2133.2004.06141.x

Gruvberger B, Andersen KE, Brandão FM, Bruynzeel DP, Bruze M, Frosch PJ, et al. Patch testing with methyldibromo glutaronitrile, a multicentre study within the EECDRG. Contact Dermatitis 2005; 52: 14-18.

https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0105-1873.2005.00480.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0105-1873.2005.00480.x

Wlodek C, Penfold CM, Bourke JF, Chowdhury MMU, Cooper SM, Ghaffar S, et al. Recommendation to test limonene hydroperoxides 0.3% and linalool hydroperoxides 1.0% in the British baseline patch test series. Br J Dermatol 2017; 177: 1708-1715.

https://doi.org/10.1111/bjd.15648 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/bjd.15648

Deza G, García-Bravo B, Silvestre JF, Pastor-Nieto MA, González-Pérez R, Heras-Mendaza F, et al. Contact sensitization to limonene and linalool hydroperoxides in Spain: a GEIDACprospective study: contact allergy to limonene and linalool hydroperoxides. Contact Dermatitis 2017; 76: 74-80.

https://doi.org/10.1111/cod.12714 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/cod.12714

Wilkinson M, Gallo R, Goossens A, Johansen JD, Rustemeyer T, Sánchez-Pérez J, et al. A proposal to create an extension to the European baseline series. Contact Dermatitis 2018; 78: 101-108.

https://doi.org/10.1111/cod.12918 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/cod.12918

Nyman GSA, Tang M, Inerot A, Osmancevic A, Malmberg P, Hagvall L. Contact allergy to beeswax and propolis among patients with cheilitis or facial dermatitis. Contact Dermatitis 2019; 81: 110-116.

https://doi.org/10.1111/cod.13306 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/cod.13306

Downloads

Published

2021-11-10

How to Cite

Nyman, G. S. A., Giménez‐Arnau , A. M., Grigaitiene, J., Malinauskiene, L., Paulsen, E., & Hagvall, L. (2021). Patch Testing with Propolis of Different Geographical Origins in a Baseline Series. Acta Dermato-Venereologica, 101(11), adv00591. https://doi.org/10.2340/actadv.v101.423