Comparison Between Brazilian Propolis and Chinese Propolis: Results From the North American Contact Dermatitis Group 2019–2022

<u><b><i></i></b></u> <u><b><i>Background:</i></b></u> Prevalence of positive patch test (ppt) reactions to propolis in Europe has varied with different allergen source origins. Compared with previous cycles, the North American Contact Dermatitis Group (NACDG) noted a marked increase in propolis positivity in 2019-2020.<u><b><i>Objective:</i></b></u> To compare propolis positivity in North American centers between 3 periods (2019, 2020, and 2021/2022), based on geographic origin and supplier.<u><b><i>Methods:</i></b></u> Retrospective analysis of NACDG patch test data (2019-2022) utilizing 3 different sources of propolis: Chinese propolis (Allergeaze-CPA), Chinese propolis (Chemotechnique-CPC), and Brazilian propolis (Allergeaze-BPA).<u><b><i>Results:</i></b></u> Proportions of ppt reactions to propolis were: 3.7% (84/2260) to CPA in 2019, 14.7% (271/1838) to BPA in 2020, and 2.2% (66/3052) to CPC in 2021/2022. There was a statistically significant difference in prevalence of reactions for BPA compared with both CPA and CPC (<i>P</i> < 0.00001).<u><b><i>Conclusions:</i></b></u> When unexpected changes are noted in patch test positivity, especially with naturally derived allergens, the reasons behind those changes should be investigated. The substitution of Brazilian for Chinese propolis resulted in a significant increase in ppt reactions.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Dermatitis
Published
2025-12-05
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/17103568251403564
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Bee Products Chemical Analysis
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.67
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Comparison Between Brazilian Propolis and Chinese Propolis: Results From the North American Contact Dermatitis Group 2019–2022

Jonathan I. Silverberg, Cory A. Dunnick, James S. Taylor, Brandon L. Adler et al.
1 citations
Dermatitis
Bee Products Chemical Analysis
1.67
article

Comparison Between Brazilian Propolis and Chinese Propolis: Results From the North American Contact Dermatitis Group 2019–2022

Jonathan I. Silverberg, Cory A. Dunnick, James S. Taylor, Brandon L. Adler, Peggy A. Wu, D. Belsito, Erin M. Warshaw, Samuel DeKoven, Nina C. Botto, Joel G. DeKoven, Amber Reck Atwater, Anton C. de Groot, Jonathan Hale Zippin, Melanie D. Pratt, Margo J. Reeder, Christen M. Mowad, Marie-Claude Houle, JiaDe Yu
article en
1 citations

Abstract

<u><b><i></i></b></u> <u><b><i>Background:</i></b></u> Prevalence of positive patch test (ppt) reactions to propolis in Europe has varied with different allergen source origins. Compared with previous cycles, the North American Contact Dermatitis Group (NACDG) noted a marked increase in propolis positivity in 2019-2020.<u><b><i>Objective:</i></b></u> To compare propolis positivity in North American centers between 3 periods (2019, 2020, and 2021/2022), based on geographic origin and supplier.<u><b><i>Methods:</i></b></u> Retrospective analysis of NACDG patch test data (2019-2022) utilizing 3 different sources of propolis: Chinese propolis (Allergeaze-CPA), Chinese propolis (Chemotechnique-CPC), and Brazilian propolis (Allergeaze-BPA).<u><b><i>Results:</i></b></u> Proportions of ppt reactions to propolis were: 3.7% (84/2260) to CPA in 2019, 14.7% (271/1838) to BPA in 2020, and 2.2% (66/3052) to CPC in 2021/2022. There was a statistically significant difference in prevalence of reactions for BPA compared with both CPA and CPC (<i>P</i> < 0.00001).<u><b><i>Conclusions:</i></b></u> When unexpected changes are noted in patch test positivity, especially with naturally derived allergens, the reasons behind those changes should be investigated. The substitution of Brazilian for Chinese propolis resulted in a significant increase in ppt reactions.

Dermatitis
University of Southern California (US), Geisinger Medical Center (US), St. Michael's Hospital (CA), University of Minnesota (US), Cleveland Clinic (US), Sunnybrook Health Science Centre (CA), University of Wisconsin–Madison (US), University of Ottawa (CA), University of California, San Francisco (US), Virginia Commonwealth University (US), George Washington University (US), Cornell University (US), Centre hospitalier universitaire de Québec (CA), Duke Medical Center (US), St Michael's Hospital (GB), Amsterdam University Medical Centers (NL), University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus (US), New York University (US), University of California, Davis (US), University of Colorado Denver (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 12%
Bee Products Chemical Analysis
1.67
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.