Red and processed meat consumption and esophageal cancer risk: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Sex-specific effects of fruit, vegetable, and red meat intake on the risk of gastric and esophageal cancer in a large cohort

BACKGROUND

Dietary effects on gastric and esophageal cancer by sex and smoking has rarely been investigated.

METHODS

Individuals who had undergone national gastric cancer screening during 2008 and had no any cancer at baseline were enrolled and followed up to 2017. The gastric and esophageal cancer risk was measured using adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

Among 3.645 million (44.1% men), 45,741 gastric cancers (67.7% men) and 3,550 esophageal cancers (89.5% men) developed during 9 years follow-up. In adjusted analysis, a frequent intake of fruit (≥ 7 servings per week) reduced the gastric cancer risk (aHR=0.91; 95% CI, 0.83-0.99) comparing to nearly no intake in women but slightly increased male gastric cancer risk (aHR=1.06; 95% CI, 1.00-1.13). A frequent intake of dietary fruit reduced the esophageal cancer risk only in men (aHR=0.75; 95% CI, 0.62-0.92). Frequent intake of red meat (3-4/week) slightly increased the gastric cancer risk only in men (aHR=1.04; 95% CI, 1.01-1.09). The favorable effect of fruit on the gastric and esophageal cancer risk was observed only in never smoker.

CONCLUSIONS

The effect of fruit and red meat intake on the gastric and esophageal cancer risk differed according to sex and smoking status.

Cancer Risk in Barrett's Esophagus: A Clinical Review

Esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) is rapidly increasing in incidence and is associated with a poor prognosis. Barrett's esophagus (BE) is a known precursor of esophageal adenocarcinoma. This review aims to explore Barrett's esophagus, esophageal adenocarcinoma, and the progression from the former to the latter. An overview of the definition, diagnosis, epidemiology, and risk factors for both entities are presented, with special attention being given to the areas of debate in the literature. The progression from Barrett's esophagus to esophageal adenocarcinoma is reviewed and the relevant molecular pathways are discussed. The definition of Barrett's esophagus remains debated and without international consensus. This, alongside other factors, has made establishing the true prevalence of Barrett's esophagus challenging. The degree of dysplasia can be a histological challenge, but is necessary to guide clinical management. The progression of BE to EAC is likely driven by inflammatory pathways, pepsin exposure, upregulation of growth factor pathways, and mitochondrial changes. Surveillance is maintained through serial endoscopic evaluation, with shorter intervals recommended for high-risk features.

Current Status and Future Prospects for Esophageal Cancer

Esophageal cancer (EC) is the ninth most common cancer and the sixth leading cause of cancer deaths worldwide. Esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) and esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) are the two main histological subtypes with distinct epidemiological and clinical features. While the global incidence of ESCC is declining, the incidence of EAC is increasing in many countries. Decades of epidemiologic research have identified distinct environmental exposures for ESCC and EAC subtypes. Recent advances in understanding the genomic aspects of EC have advanced our understanding of EC causes and led to using specific genomic alterations in EC tumors as biomarkers for early diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis of this cancer. Nevertheless, the prognosis of EC is still poor, with a five-year survival rate of less than 20%. Currently, there are significant challenges for early detection and secondary prevention for both ESCC and EAC subtypes, but Cytosponge™ is shifting this position for EAC. Primary prevention remains the preferred strategy for reducing the global burden of EC. In this review, we will summarize recent advances, current status, and future prospects of the studies related to epidemiology, time trends, environmental risk factors, prevention, early diagnosis, and treatment for both EC subtypes.

Consumption of red meat and processed meat and cancer incidence: a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective studies

Red meat and processed meat consumption has been hypothesized to increase risk of cancer, but the evidence is inconsistent. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective studies to summarize the evidence of associations between consumption of red meat (unprocessed), processed meat, and total red and processed meat with the incidence of various cancer types. We searched in MEDLINE and EMBASE databases through December 2020. Using a random-effect meta-analysis, we calculated the pooled relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) of the highest versus the lowest category of red meat, processed meat, and total red and processed meat consumption in relation to incidence of various cancers. We identified 148 published articles. Red meat consumption was significantly associated with greater risk of breast cancer (RR = 1.09; 95% CI = 1.03-1.15), endometrial cancer (RR = 1.25; 95% CI = 1.01-1.56), colorectal cancer (RR = 1.10; 95% CI = 1.03-1.17), colon cancer (RR = 1.17; 95% CI = 1.09-1.25), rectal cancer (RR = 1.22; 95% CI = 1.01-1.46), lung cancer (RR = 1.26; 95% CI = 1.09-1.44), and hepatocellular carcinoma (RR = 1.22; 95% CI = 1.01-1.46). Processed meat consumption was significantly associated with a 6% greater breast cancer risk, an 18% greater colorectal cancer risk, a 21% greater colon cancer risk, a 22% greater rectal cancer risk, and a 12% greater lung cancer risk. Total red and processed meat consumption was significantly associated with greater risk of colorectal cancer (RR = 1.17; 95% CI = 1.08-1.26), colon cancer (RR = 1.21; 95% CI = 1.09-1.34), rectal cancer (RR = 1.26; 95% CI = 1.09-1.45), lung cancer (RR = 1.20; 95% CI = 1.09-1.33), and renal cell cancer (RR = 1.19; 95% CI = 1.04-1.37). This comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis study showed that high red meat intake was positively associated with risk of breast cancer, endometrial cancer, colorectal cancer, colon cancer, rectal cancer, lung cancer, and hepatocellular carcinoma, and high processed meat intake was positively associated with risk of breast, colorectal, colon, rectal, and lung cancers. Higher risk of colorectal, colon, rectal, lung, and renal cell cancers were also observed with high total red and processed meat consumption.

Modelling the Effects of Roselle Extract, Potato Peel Flour, and Beef Fat on the Sensory Properties and Heterocyclic Amines Formation of Beef Patties Studied by Using Response Surface Methodology

Heterocyclic amines (HCAs) are compounds with carcinogenic potential formed during high-temperature processing of meat and meat products. Vegetables or their extracts with high antioxidant capacity can be incorporated into the meat matrix to reduce their formation, but it is necessary to find the optimal levels to achieve maximum inhibition without affecting the sensory properties. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effects of roselle extract (RE, 0-1%), potato peel flour (PP, 0-2%), and beef fat (BF, 0-15%) on the sensory properties and formation of HCAs in beef patties using response surface methodology. IQx, IQ, MeIQx, MeIQ, 4,8-DiMeIQx, and PhIP were identified and quantified by HPLC. Regression models were developed to predict sensory properties and HCAs' formation. All models were significant (p < 0.05) and showed a R2 > 0.70. Roselle extract and beef fat had a negative linear effect on the formation of the total HCAs, while PP had a positive linear effect. The optimal formula that minimizes the formation of HCAs included 0.63% RE, 0.99% PP, and 11.96% BF. RE and PP are foods that can be used as ingredients in low-fat beef patties to minimize the formation of HCAs without affecting their sensory properties.