Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34461350›Full record

SynthesisNutrition research (New York, N.Y.)2021

Intake of artificial sweeteners among adults is associated with reduced odds of gastrointestinal luminal cancers: a meta-analysis of cohort and case-control studies.

Adam Tepler, Gila Hoffman, Shawn Jindal, Neeraj Narula, Shailja C Shah

Open access · greenAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Nutrition research (New York, N.Y.), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 24% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Adam TeplerDepartment of Medicine, New York University Langone Health, New York City, NY, USA.
Gila HoffmanDepartment of Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA.
Shawn JindalDepartment of Medicine, Montefiore Medical Center, New York City, NY, USA.
Neeraj NarulaDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine and Farncombe Family Digestive Health Research Institute, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Shailja C ShahSection of Gastroenterology, Veterans Affairs San Diego Healthcare System, San Diego, CA, 92161, USA; Division of Gastroenterology, University of California, San Diego, San Diego, CA, 92161, USA; Division of Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA. Electronic address: s6shah@health.ucsd.edu.
Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center · USMontefiore Medical Center · USNYU Langone Health · USPopulation Health Research Institute · CAUniversity of California, San Diego · US

Funding

Learning Health System Scholar Program at VanderbiltK12HS026395 · AHRQ · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER · PI ROTHMAN, RUSSELL L., ROUMIE, CHRISTIANNE L. · 2018 to 2022
$2.7M
AHRQ HHS K12 HS026395CSRD VA IK2 CX002027
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The association between artificial sweetener (AS) consumption and the risk of organ-specific cancers has been debated for decades. We hypothesized that AS consumption is associated with reduced risk of gastrointestinal (GI) cancers. We aimed to test this hypothesis by conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis of the association between AS and GI cancers. We searched 4 databases for comparative studies of AS consumption (exposed) versus no consumption (nonexposed) and the odds or risk of GI luminal or non-luminal cancer (primary outcome). Estimates were pooled using a random-effects model. Studies were evaluated for quality, bias, and heterogeneity. We analyzed 8 (4 prospective, 4 case-control) studies comprising data on 1,043,496 individuals, among whom 3271 pancreatic, 395 gastric, 304 esophageal, 3008 colorectal, and 598 oropharyngeal cancers occurred. While there was no significant association between AS consumption and odds of GI cancer overall, AS consumption was associated with 19% reduced likelihood of luminal GI cancer (OR 0.81, 95% CI:0.68-0.97). There was no association between AS consumption and non-luminal GI cancer. Meta-regression demonstrated no difference in effect estimates based on study type. Based on this first meta-analysis of AS and GI cancer, we demonstrated that AS consumption is associated with a significantly lower likelihood of luminal, but not non-luminal, GI cancer.

Indexed as

NeoplasmsSweetening AgentsAdultCase-Control StudiesHumansProspective StudiesRisk FactorsSweetening AgentsDigestive system neoplasmEnvironment and public healthEpidemiologyMeta-analysisNutrition therapySystematic review

Identifiers

PMID34461350
PMCPMC8818300
OpenAlexW3191134431

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.