Ultra-processed food consumption and increased risk of metabolic syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies

Ultra-processed food exposure and adverse health outcomes: umbrella review of epidemiological meta-analyses

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the existing meta-analytic evidence of associations between exposure to ultra-processed foods, as defined by the Nova food classification system, and adverse health outcomes.

DESIGN

Systematic umbrella review of existing meta-analyses.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Embase, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, as well as manual searches of reference lists from 2009 to June 2023.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES

Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of cohort, case-control, and/or cross sectional study designs. To evaluate the credibility of evidence, pre-specified evidence classification criteria were applied, graded as convincing ("class I"), highly suggestive ("class II"), suggestive ("class III"), weak ("class IV"), or no evidence ("class V"). The quality of evidence was assessed using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations) framework, categorised as "high," "moderate," "low," or "very low" quality.

RESULTS

The search identified 45 unique pooled analyses, including 13 dose-response associations and 32 non-dose-response associations (n=9 888 373). Overall, direct associations were found between exposure to ultra-processed foods and 32 (71%) health parameters spanning mortality, cancer, and mental, respiratory, cardiovascular, gastrointestinal, and metabolic health outcomes. Based on the pre-specified evidence classification criteria, convincing evidence (class I) supported direct associations between greater ultra-processed food exposure and higher risks of incident cardiovascular disease related mortality (risk ratio 1.50, 95% confidence interval 1.37 to 1.63; GRADE=very low) and type 2 diabetes (dose-response risk ratio 1.12, 1.11 to 1.13; moderate), as well as higher risks of prevalent anxiety outcomes (odds ratio 1.48, 1.37 to 1.59; low) and combined common mental disorder outcomes (odds ratio 1.53, 1.43 to 1.63; low). Highly suggestive (class II) evidence indicated that greater exposure to ultra-processed foods was directly associated with higher risks of incident all cause mortality (risk ratio 1.21, 1.15 to 1.27; low), heart disease related mortality (hazard ratio 1.66, 1.51 to 1.84; low), type 2 diabetes (odds ratio 1.40, 1.23 to 1.59; very low), and depressive outcomes (hazard ratio 1.22, 1.16 to 1.28; low), together with higher risks of prevalent adverse sleep related outcomes (odds ratio 1.41, 1.24 to 1.61; low), wheezing (risk ratio 1.40, 1.27 to 1.55; low), and obesity (odds ratio 1.55, 1.36 to 1.77; low). Of the remaining 34 pooled analyses, 21 were graded as suggestive or weak strength (class III-IV) and 13 were graded as no evidence (class V). Overall, using the GRADE framework, 22 pooled analyses were rated as low quality, with 19 rated as very low quality and four rated as moderate quality.

CONCLUSIONS

Greater exposure to ultra-processed food was associated with a higher risk of adverse health outcomes, especially cardiometabolic, common mental disorder, and mortality outcomes. These findings provide a rationale to develop and evaluate the effectiveness of using population based and public health measures to target and reduce dietary exposure to ultra-processed foods for improved human health. They also inform and provide support for urgent mechanistic research.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42023412732.

Ultra-processed food consumption and human health: an umbrella review of systematic reviews with meta-analyses

Recently, ultra-processed foods received a lot of attention, but also criticism. Our aim was to provide an overview of the existing evidence of ultra-processed food consumption on human health. We conducted a systematic search in four databases until January 5th, 2024. Systematic reviews with meta-analyses on ultra-processed food consumption as defined by the NOVA classification system were included. The certainty of evidence was evaluated by the GRADE approach. We identified 16 publications. Moderate certainty of evidence was found for all-cause mortality (Summary Risk Ratio per 50 g: 1.02; 95% confidence Interval (CI): 1.01, 1.03), cardiovascular disease incidence and mortality (per 50 g/d: 1.04; 95% CI: 1.02, 1.06, and 1.05; 95% CI: 1.01, 1.08), type 2 diabetes incidence (per 10%: 1.12; 95% CI: 1.10, 1.13) and colorectal cancer (per 10%: 1.04; 95% CI: 1.01, 1.07). For several outcomes such as inflammatory bowel diseases, obesity, metabolic syndrome, nonalcoholic fatty liver disease, mental health as well as nutrient quality, similar estimates were observed, but certainty of evidence was limited. Discussing the NOVA concept, it remains unclear whether the processing of foods leads to increased health risks or if ultra-processed food consumption is only a measure for poor diet quality.

Ultra-processed food consumption and metabolic disease risk: an umbrella review of systematic reviews with meta-analyses of observational studies

Background and aims

There is an ongoing debate on whether to advocate reducing ultra-processed food (UPF) in dietary guidelines to control metabolic disease (such as obesity and type 2 diabetes mellitus [T2DM]). We aimed to summarize the evidence from systematic reviews with meta-analyses between UPF consumption and metabolic diseases risk, assess the credibility, and verify the robustness of these associations.

Methods

We systematically searched PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases from their inception to July 15, 2023, to identify relevant systematic reviews with meta-analyses. We used the random-effects model to evaluate the summary effect size, along with 95% confidence interval and prediction interval. We also assessed heterogeneity, evidence of small-study effects and excess significance bias, and categorized the credibility of each association based on quantitative umbrella review criteria. Additionally, we conducted subgroup and sensitivity analyses to assess the robustness of associations based on continents, study design, dietary assessment methods, definition methods of UPF, population, and units of UPF consumption.

Results

Overall, 6 systematic reviews with 13 meta-analyses were included. Three (23.08%) meta-analyses were classified as highly suggestive evidence for meeting the criteria that associations were significant at p < 10-6, had more than 1,000 cases, and presented the largest study with significance at p < 0.05. Among them, the highest UPF consumption quantile was associated with an increased risk of obesity (OR = 1.55, 95% CI: 1.36-1.77) when compared with the lowest UPF consumption quantile. The highest UPF consumption quantile was associated with an increased risk of T2DM (RR = 1.40, 95% CI: 1.23-1.59) when compared with the lowest UPF consumption quantile, and a 10% increase in UPF consumption (% g/d) was associated with an increased risk of T2DM (RR = 1.12, 95% CI: 1.10-1.13). Meanwhile, the robustness of these associations was verified by a series of subgroup and sensitivity analyses.

Conclusion

UPF consumption may be a risk factor for several metabolic diseases. However, well-designed studies are still needed to verify our findings in the future.