Results of patch testing propolis in the European baseline series: A 4-year retrospective study

IF 4.8 1区医学 Q2 ALLERGY

Contact Dermatitis Pub Date : 2024-08-21 DOI:10.1111/cod.14678

Gizem Kocabas, Norbertus A. Ipenburg, Anton de Groot, Thomas Rustemeyer

{"title":"Results of patch testing propolis in the European baseline series: A 4-year retrospective study","authors":"Gizem Kocabas, Norbertus A. Ipenburg, Anton de Groot, Thomas Rustemeyer","doi":"10.1111/cod.14678","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Propolis was added to the European baseline series (EBS) in 2019.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objectives</h3>\n \n <p>To investigate the frequency and relevance of positive patch tests to propolis in the EBS and to study co-reactivities.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Patients and Methods</h3>\n \n <p>Retrospective study in patients patch tested between June 2019 and November 2023 in a university hospital in Amsterdam, The Netherlands.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Of 3134 consecutive patients, 299 (9.5%) had a positive reaction to propolis 10% pet. Only nine reactions (3%) were judged to be clinically relevant. There were significant co-reactivities to <i>Myroxylon pereirae</i> resin (balsam of Peru), colophonium, fragrance mixes 1 and 2, and to limonene and linalool hydroperoxides. A steep increase in rates of positive reactions to propolis was observed from 2020 to 2023. This was highly likely the result of the replacement of Chinese propolis with Brazilian propolis by the manufacturer.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>Positive patch tests for propolis are very frequent in Amsterdam, but only a few of these reactions are relevant. Most are probably (pseudo-)cross-reactions in patients with fragrance allergies. Propolis in the EBS has very limited value for dermatologists and patients in The Netherlands. Changes in patch test materials should be provided to all users to avoid misinterpretation of patch test results.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":10527,"journal":{"name":"Contact Dermatitis","volume":"91 5","pages":"375-378"},"PeriodicalIF":4.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/cod.14678","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Contact Dermatitis","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/cod.14678","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ALLERGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Propolis was added to the European baseline series (EBS) in 2019.

Objectives

To investigate the frequency and relevance of positive patch tests to propolis in the EBS and to study co-reactivities.

Patients and Methods

Retrospective study in patients patch tested between June 2019 and November 2023 in a university hospital in Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Results

Of 3134 consecutive patients, 299 (9.5%) had a positive reaction to propolis 10% pet. Only nine reactions (3%) were judged to be clinically relevant. There were significant co-reactivities to Myroxylon pereirae resin (balsam of Peru), colophonium, fragrance mixes 1 and 2, and to limonene and linalool hydroperoxides. A steep increase in rates of positive reactions to propolis was observed from 2020 to 2023. This was highly likely the result of the replacement of Chinese propolis with Brazilian propolis by the manufacturer.

Conclusions

Positive patch tests for propolis are very frequent in Amsterdam, but only a few of these reactions are relevant. Most are probably (pseudo-)cross-reactions in patients with fragrance allergies. Propolis in the EBS has very limited value for dermatologists and patients in The Netherlands. Changes in patch test materials should be provided to all users to avoid misinterpretation of patch test results.

Abstract Image

查看原文本刊更多论文

欧洲基线系列蜂胶贴片测试结果：一项为期 4 年的回顾性研究。

背景：蜂胶于2019年被纳入欧洲基线系列（EBS）：蜂胶于2019年被纳入欧洲基线系列（EBS）：调查EBS中蜂胶斑贴试验阳性的频率和相关性，并研究共同反应性：回顾性研究：2019 年 6 月至 2023 年 11 月期间在荷兰阿姆斯特丹一家大学医院接受斑贴检测的患者：在3134名连续患者中，有299人（9.5%）对蜂胶10%宠物产生了阳性反应。只有9种反应（3%）被判定为临床相关反应。对Myroxylon pereirae resin（秘鲁香脂）、colophonium、香料混合物1和2以及柠檬烯和芳樟醇氢过氧化物有明显的共反应。从 2020 年到 2023 年，蜂胶的阳性反应率急剧上升。这很可能是生产商用巴西蜂胶替代中国蜂胶的结果：结论：在阿姆斯特丹，蜂胶斑贴试验阳性反应非常频繁，但其中只有少数反应是相关的。大多数可能是香料过敏患者的（假）交叉反应。EBS中的蜂胶对荷兰的皮肤科医生和患者的价值非常有限。应向所有用户提供贴片测试材料的变化，以避免对贴片测试结果产生误解。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Contact Dermatitis 医学-过敏

CiteScore

4.60

自引率

30.90%

发文量

227

审稿时长

4-8 weeks

期刊介绍： Contact Dermatitis is designed primarily as a journal for clinicians who are interested in various aspects of environmental dermatitis. This includes both allergic and irritant (toxic) types of contact dermatitis, occupational (industrial) dermatitis and consumers" dermatitis from such products as cosmetics and toiletries. The journal aims at promoting and maintaining communication among dermatologists, industrial physicians, allergists and clinical immunologists, as well as chemists and research workers involved in industry and the production of consumer goods. Papers are invited on clinical observations, diagnosis and methods of investigation of patients, therapeutic measures, organisation and legislation relating to the control of occupational and consumers".