IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0070955.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Red and Processed Meat Intake Is Associated with Higher Gastric Cancer Risk: A Meta-Analysis of Epidemiological Observational Studies

Author

Listed:
  • Hongcheng Zhu
  • Xi Yang
  • Chi Zhang
  • Chen Zhu
  • Guangzhou Tao
  • Lianjun Zhao
  • Shaowen Tang
  • Zheng Shu
  • Jing Cai
  • Shengbin Dai
  • Qin Qin
  • Liping Xu
  • Hongyan Cheng
  • Xinchen Sun

Abstract

Background: Red and processed meat was concluded as a limited-suggestive risk factor of gastric cancer by the World Cancer Research Fund. However, recent epidemiological studies have yielded inconclusive results. Methods: We searched Medline, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library from their inception to April 2013 for both cohort and case-control studies which assessed the association between red and/or processed meat intake and gastric cancer risk. Study-specific relative risk estimates were polled by random-effect or fixed-effect models. Results: Twelve cohort and thirty case-control studies were included in the meta-analysis. Significant associations were found between both red (RR: 1.45, 95% CI: 1.22–1.73) and processed (RR: 1.45, 95% CI: 1.26–1.65) meat intake and gastric cancer risk generally. Positive findings were also existed in the items of beef (RR: 1.28, 95% CI: 1.04–1.57), bacon (RR: 1.37, 95% CI: 1.17–1.61), ham (RR: 1.44, 95% CI: 1.00–2.06), and sausage (RR: 1.33, 95% CI: 1.16–1.52). When conducted by study design, the association was significant in case-control studies (RR: 1.63, 95% CI: 1.33–1.99) but not in cohort studies (RR: 1.02, 95% CI: 0.90–1.17) for red meat. Increased relative risks were seen in high-quality, adenocarcinoma, cardia and European-population studies for red meat. And most subgroup analysis confirmed the significant association between processed meat intake and gastric cancer risk. Conclusions: Our findings indicate that consumption of red and/or processed meat contributes to increased gastric cancer risk. However, further investigation is needed to confirm the association, especially for red meat.

Suggested Citation

  • Hongcheng Zhu & Xi Yang & Chi Zhang & Chen Zhu & Guangzhou Tao & Lianjun Zhao & Shaowen Tang & Zheng Shu & Jing Cai & Shengbin Dai & Qin Qin & Liping Xu & Hongyan Cheng & Xinchen Sun, 2013. "Red and Processed Meat Intake Is Associated with Higher Gastric Cancer Risk: A Meta-Analysis of Epidemiological Observational Studies," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(8), pages 1-10, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0070955
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0070955
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0070955
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0070955&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0070955?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jun Han & Yi Jiang & Xiao Liu & Qingyang Meng & Qiulei Xi & Qiulin Zhuang & Yusong Han & Ying Gao & Qiurong Ding & Guohao Wu, 2015. "Dietary Fat Intake and Risk of Gastric Cancer: A Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(9), pages 1-18, September.
    2. Mina Nicole Händel & Isabel Cardoso & Katrine Marie Rasmussen & Jeanett Friis Rohde & Ramune Jacobsen & Sabrina Mai Nielsen & Robin Christensen & Berit Lilienthal Heitmann, 2019. "Processed meat intake and chronic disease morbidity and mortality: An overview of systematic reviews and meta-analyses," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(10), pages 1-20, October.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0070955. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.