Ultra-processed food consumption and cancer risk: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Isaksen IM, Dankel SN
Clinical nutrition (Edinburgh, Scotland) · 101 citas
Cómo se estudió
- Diseño
- Metaanálisis (indexado por PubMed)
- Estudiado en
- Personas
- Resultado principal
- Eventos clínicos como enfermedad o muerte
- Consumo medido con
- No se indica
Quién lo pagó
- Financiación
- Financiación independiente
- Organización sin fines de lucro
- Trond Mohn stiftelse
- Universidad u hospital
- Universitetet i Bergen
Según 2 financiadores declarados.
Publicación
- Publicado
- 2023-03-30 · Clin Nutr · vol. 42 · número 6 · págs. 919–928
- Editorial
- Elsevier BV
- Citado
- 152 citas · más que el 99% de estudios similares · 9.8× el promedio de su campo
- Impacto
- Entre el 10 % más citado de su campo
- Referencias
- 54 trabajos
- Acceso
- De pago
- Áreas de investigación
- Consumer Attitudes and Food Labeling · Nutritional Studies and Diet · Global Public Health Policies and Epidemiology
- Palabras clave
- ultra-processed foods, cancer risk, NOVA classification, breast cancer, colorectal cancer, pancreatic cancer, chronic lymphocytic leukemia, central nervous system tumors, dietary intake, non-communicable diseases
- MeSH
- humans, colorectal neoplasms, pancreatic neoplasms, diet, retrospective studies, prospective studies, food handling, male, leukemia, lymphocytic, chronic, b-cell, fast foods, food, processed
2 autores
- Irja Minde Isaksen🇳🇴University of Bergen
- Simon N. Dankel🇳🇴 · autor de correspondenciaHaukeland University Hospital; University of Bergen
Resumen
El texto original del estudio, en el idioma en que se publicó.
Background
Ultra-processed foods (UPF) have become a staple of the diet in many countries, concomitant with increases in non-communicable diseases including cancer.
Aim
The aim of this systematic literature review was to evaluate associations between the consumption of UPF and cancer risk.
Methods
A systematic literature search for observational studies investigating the association between cancer risk and UPF consumption, determined by the NOVA classification system, was performed. Random-effects meta-analyses were conducted. Independent review and risk of bias assessment was performed independently by the authors using the National Institutes of Health's Study Quality Assessment Tools.
Results
Eleven reports were identified, including eight retrospective case-control studies and three prospective cohorts. The outcome was risk of total cancer and/or one or more of the following cancers: colorectal, breast, prostate, pancreatic, chronic lymphocytic leukemia and central nervous system tumors. Nine studies reported a significant positive association between UPF intake and all the assessed cancers except prostate, after adjustment for confounding factors including obesity and total energy intake. A 10% increment in the diet's proportion of UPF was associated with increased risk of overall cancer (HR = 1.13, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.18) and breast cancer (HR = 1.11, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.21). In addition, a high intake of UPF was associated with increased risk of colorectal cancer (ORT3 vs. T1 = 1.30, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.51) and pancreatic cancer (HRQ4 vs. Q1 = 1.49, 95% CI 1.07 to 2.07). More modest associations were found for chronic lymphocytic leukemia and central nervous system tumors. Common limitations of several of the studies included no prior assessment of diet before known diagnosis (the case-control studies), higher participation rates among cases, and likely misclassification of several foods as UPF or non-UPF.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the available suggestive evidence shows a consistent significant association between intake of UPF and the risk of overall and several cancers, including colorectal-, breast- and pancreatic cancer. These data may inform updated dietary guidelines, policy makers and the public towards improving public health.
Resumen vía Europe PMC. Los derechos de autor siguen siendo de los autores o la editorial.
Confianza de la comunidad
Cargando…
¿Cuánto confías en los hallazgos de este estudio?
Comentarios
¿Algo está mal aquí?
Señala este estudio si su información, etiquetas o financiación parecen incorrectas. Un editor revisa cada señalamiento.
Información educativa sobre investigación publicada. No es consejo médico ni una recomendación para empezar o dejar nada.