Can Artificial Sweeteners Increase the Risk of Cancer Incidence and Mortality: Evidence from Prospective Studies

Linking artificial sweetener intake with kidney function: insights from NHANES 2003-2006 and findings from Mendelian randomization research

Background

The current investigation examines the association between artificial sweetener (AS) consumption and the likelihood of developing chronic kidney disease (CKD), along with its impact on kidney function.

Methods

We utilized data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey from 2003-2006 to conduct covariance analysis and weighted adjusted logistic regression, aiming to assess the association between artificial sweetener intake and CKD risk, as well as kidney function indicators. Subsequently, we employed Mendelian randomization methods to validate the causal relationship between the intake of artificial sweeteners, CKD risk, and kidney function indicators. Instrumental variable analysis using inverse-variance weighting and Robust adjusted profile score were the primary analytical methods employed.

Results

A total of 20,470 participants were included in the study, with 1,257 participants ultimately included in the analysis. In all adjusted logistic regression models, no significant association was found between the intake of artificial sweeteners and CKD risk. Similarly, the summary odds ratios (OR) for each unit change in genetically predicted CKD risk were 2.14 (95% CI: 0.83, 5.21, p = 0.092), 1.41 (95% CI: 0.54, 3.63, p = 0.482), and 1.50 (95% CI: 0.50, 4.52, p = 0.468) for the impact of artificial sweeteners added to cereals, tea, and coffee, respectively. It was only observed that adding artificial sweeteners to coffee was associated with a modest reduction in urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio (OR = 0.94, 95% CI: -0.108, -0.022, p = 0.003), the effect appeared to be relatively small and may not directly impact the individual level.

Conclusion

Our study does not support a causal relationship between artificial sweetener intake and the risk of CKD. However, due to the limitations and potential confounding factors, these findings need to be further validated through larger sample sizes in observational studies and Mendelian randomization analyses.

The causal association between artificial sweeteners and the risk of cancer: a Mendelian randomization study

Artificial sweeteners (ASs) have been widely added to food and beverages because of their properties of low calories and sweet taste. However, whether the consumption of ASs is causally associated with cancer risk is not clear. Here, we utilized the two-sample Mendelian randomization (MR) method to study the potential causal association. Genetic variants like single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) associated with exposure (AS consumption) were extracted from a genome-wide association study (GWAS) database including 64 949 Europeans and the influence of confounding was removed. The outcome was from 98 GWAS data and included several types of cancers like lung cancer, colorectal cancer, stomach cancer, breast cancer, and so on. The exposure-outcome SNPs were harmonized and then MR analysis was performed. The inverse-variance weighted (IVW) with random effects was used as the main analytical method accompanied by four complementary methods: MR Egger, weighted median, simple mode, and weighted mode. Sensitivity analyses consisted of heterogeneity, pleiotropy, and leave-one-out analysis. Our results demonstrated that ASs added to coffee had a positive association with high-grade and low-grade serous ovarian cancer; ASs added to tea had a positive association with oral cavity and pharyngeal cancers, but a negative association with malignant neoplasm of the bronchus and lungs. No other cancers had a genetic causal association with AS consumption. Our MR study revealed that AS consumption had no genetic causal association with major cancers. Larger MR studies or RCTs are needed to investigate small effects and support this conclusion.

New Zealand household purchases of sugar-sweetened, artificially sweetened, and unsweetened beverages: 2015-2019

OBJECTIVE

To assess annual household purchases of sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs), artificially sweetened beverages (AFSBs), and unsweetened beverages (USBs) by household composition and income, and over time.

DESIGN

Observational cohort study using beverage purchasing data linked to a supermarket database. ANOVA was used to compare total household purchase volumes (L) and the contribution of beverages purchased by category, household composition (size), household income (four categories from New Zealand (NZ) < $30 000 to > $90 000), and over time (trend from 2015 to 2019).

SETTING

Aotearoa NZ.

PARTICIPANTS

∼1800 households in the NielsenIQ Homescan® market research panel.

RESULTS

In 2019, the mean (sd) annual household purchase volume and relative contribution to total beverage volume of SSBs were 72·3 (93·0) L and 33 %, respectively. Corresponding values for AFSBs were 32·5 (79·3) L (15 %), and USBs were 112·5 (100·9) L (52 %). Larger households purchased more of all beverage types except AFSBs. Total purchases were similar by income, but households earning < $NZ 30 000 purchased fewer AFSBs and USBs (but not SSBs) than households earning > $NZ 90 000. Total and USB purchases were unchanged over time, but SSBs dropped by 5·9 L (P-trend = 0·04), and AFSBs increased by 5·3 L (P-trend = 0·00).

CONCLUSIONS

USBs contributed the most to household beverage purchases. Total purchases were higher for larger households and similar by income, including for SSBs. The reduction over time was too small for health benefits. Findings support policies and interventions to reduce SSB consumption and highlight the importance of focusing on equitable outcomes.

The Impact of Artificial Sweeteners on Human Health and Cancer Association: A Comprehensive Clinical Review

Artificial sweeteners are sugar substitutes that provide high sweetening power associated with low accompanied calories. In this study, we aim to review the data on the use, benefits, side effects, and cancer risks of artificial sweeteners. We reviewed data in the PubMed, MEDLINE, Google Scholar, Embase, and Scopus databases to search for studies about artificial sweeteners from the inception of the database to July 20, 2023, published in the English language. We discuss systematic reviews and meta-analyses, randomized clinical trials, and observational cohort studies that address the use of artificial sweeteners and their effect on health. In our review, we show that artificial sweeteners have been shown to impact various functions of the gastrointestinal system. Other studies have demonstrated an association with neurologic symptoms such as headache and taste alteration. Moreover, recent studies have established an association between artificial sweeteners and cardiovascular risk and diabetes. Importantly, the majority of research data show no link between the use of artificial sweeteners and cancer risk. Although most studies show that there is no established link between these products and cancer risk, artificial sweeteners are associated with multiple diseases. Hence, more studies are needed to better characterize the effect of artificial sweeteners on human health.

Sweeteners and the Gut Microbiome: Effects on Gastrointestinal Cancers

Worldwide, the demand for natural and synthetic sweeteners in the food industry as an alternative to refined sugar is increasing. This has prompted more research to be conducted to estimate its safety and effects on health. The gut microbiome is critical in metabolizing selected sweeteners which might affect overall health. Recently, more studies have evaluated the relationship between sweeteners and the gut microbiome. This review summarizes the current knowledge regarding the role played by the gut microbiome in metabolizing selected sweeteners. It also addresses the influence of the five selected sweeteners and their metabolites on GI cancer-related pathways. Overall, the observed positive effects of sweetener consumption on GI cancer pathways, such as apoptosis and cell cycle arrest, require further investigation in order to understand the underlying mechanism.

Is the Use of Artificial Sweeteners Beneficial for Patients with Diabetes Mellitus? The Advantages and Disadvantages of Artificial Sweeteners

Artificial sweeteners have been developed as substitutes for sugar. Sucralose, acesulfame K (ACE K), aspartame, and saccharin are artificial sweeteners. Previously, artificial sweeteners were thought to be effective in treating obesity and diabetes. Human meta-analyses have reported that artificial sweeteners have no effect on body weight or glycemic control. However, recent studies have shown that artificial sweeteners affect glucose absorption in the intestinal tract as well as insulin and incretin secretion in humans and animals. Moreover, artificial sweeteners alter the composition of the microbiota and worsen the glycemic control owing to changes in the gut microbiota. The early intake of ACE K was also shown to suppress the taste response to sugar. Furthermore, a large cohort study showed that high artificial sweetener intake was associated with all-cause mortality, cardiovascular risk, coronary artery disease risk, cerebrovascular risk, and cancer risk. The role of artificial sweeteners in the treatment of diabetes and obesity should be reconsidered, and the replacement of sugar with artificial sweeteners in patients will require the long-term tracking of not only intake but also changes in blood glucose and weight as well as future guidance based on gut bacteria data. To utilize the beneficial properties of artificial sweeteners in treatment, further studies are needed.