ReviewNutrition research reviews2010
Dietary factors and the risks of oesophageal adenocarcinoma and Barrett's oesophagus.
Review in Nutrition research reviews, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 46 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
46 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 101 citations in OpenAlex.
- Lifestyle, WCRF/AICR Recommendations, and Esophageal Adenocarcinoma Risk: A Systematic Review of the Literature.Nutrients · 2021Pooled it
- Meta-analysis of the association between dietary inflammatory index (DII) and upper aerodigestive tract cancer risk.Medicine · 2020Pooled it
- Dietary fruit, vegetable, fat, and red and processed meat intakes and Barrett's esophagus risk: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Scientific reports · 2016Pooled it
- Ultra-processed Foods and Gastrointestinal Cancer: Epidemiologic Evidence, Mechanistic Pathways, and Clinical Implications.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2026Review
- Article
- Metabolic reprogramming in cancer and senescence.MedComm · 2025Review
- The Role of a Plant-Only (Vegan) Diet in Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease: Online Survey of the Italian General Population.Nutrients · 2023Article
- Dietary and Nutritional Support in Gastrointestinal Diseases of the Upper Gastrointestinal Tract (I): Esophagus.Nutrients · 2022Review
- PD-1 blockade enhances chemotherapy toxicity in oesophageal adenocarcinoma.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Management of nondysplastic Barrett's esophagus: When to survey? When to ablate?Therapeutic advances in chronic disease · 2022Review
- Dietary Intake in Relation to the Risk of Reflux Disease: A Systematic Review.Preventive nutrition and food science · 2021Review
- Exploring a possible association between the occurrence of theBiochemistry and biophysics reports · 2021Article
- High-Fructose Diet Alters Intestinal Microbial Profile and Correlates with Early Tumorigenesis in a Mouse Model of Barrett's Esophagus.Microorganisms · 2021Article
- Dietary Habits and Risk of Esophagitis and Barrett's Esophagus: A Multicenter Italian Case-Control Study.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2021Article
- Role of microbial dysbiosis in the pathogenesis of esophageal mucosal disease: A paradigm shift from acid to bacteria?World journal of gastroenterology · 2021Review
- Nutritional Status and Feeding Regimen of Patients with Esophagus Cancer-A Study from Vietnam.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Changing trends in the disease burden of esophageal cancer in China from 1990 to 2017 and its predicted level in 25 years.Cancer medicine · 2021Article
- Chemoprevention in Barrett's esophagus and esophageal adenocarcinoma.Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology · 2021Review
- Barretts's carcinogenesis.Pathology international · 2019Article
- Barrett's esophagus with high grade dysplasia is associated with non-esophageal cancer.World journal of gastroenterology · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Incidence rates for oesophageal adenocarcinoma have increased by over 500% during the past few decades without clear reasons. Gastro-oesophageal reflux disease, obesity and smoking have been identified as risk factors, although the demographic distribution of these risk factors is not consistent with the demographic distribution of oesophageal adenocarcinoma, which is substantially more common among whites and males than any other demographic groups. Numerous epidemiological studies have suggested associations between dietary factors and the risks of oesophageal adenocarcinoma and its precursor, Barrett's oesophagus, though a comprehensive review is lacking. The main aim of the present review is to consider the evidence linking dietary factors with the risks of oesophageal adenocarcinoma, Barrett's oesophagus, and the progression from Barrett's oesophagus to oesophageal adenocarcinoma. The existing epidemiological evidence is strongest for an inverse relationship between intake of vitamin C, β-carotene, fruits and vegetables, particularly raw fruits and vegetables and dark green, leafy and cruciferous vegetables, carbohydrates, fibre and Fe and the risk of oesophageal adenocarcinoma and Barrett's oesophagus. Patients at higher risk for Barrett's oesophagus and oesophageal adenocarcinoma may benefit from increasing their consumption of fruits and vegetables and reducing their intake of red meat and other processed food items. Further research is needed to evaluate the relationship between diet and the progression of Barrett's oesophagus to oesophageal adenocarcinoma. Evidence from cohort studies will help determine whether randomised chemoprevention trials are warranted for the primary prevention of Barrett's oesophagus or its progression to cancer.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.