ArticleNutrition research and practice2021
Effects of garlic intake on cancer: a systematic review of randomized clinical trials and cohort studies.
Article in Nutrition research and practice, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impact of Micro and Nanoplastics on Reproductive Cancer and the Potential Anticancer Benefits of Prolonged Ginger, Garlic, and Turmeric Consumption: A Narrative Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2026Review
- Dual Role of Diallyl Disulfide (DADS) on Invasive Potential and β-Catenin Dynamics in HER2-Positive Breast Cancer Cells.Cancers · 2025Article
- Aged garlic extract major constituent S-1-propenyl-l-cysteine inhibits proinflammatory mRNA expression in bronchial epithelial IB3-1 cells exposed to the BNT162b2 vaccine.Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 2025Article
- Garlic Extract Triggers Cytotoxicity, DNA Damage, and Cell Cycle Arrest in Human Leukemic CellsJournal of nutrition & food sciences · 2025Article
- Green Chemically Synthesized Iron Oxide Nanoparticles-Chitosan Coatings for Enhancing Strawberry Shelf-Life.Polymers · 2024Article
- 'Superfoods': Reliability of the Information for Consumers Available on the Web.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectivesDue to the rapid increase of global cancer incidence and mortality and a high level of interest in cancer prevention, a systematic review of garlic intake and cancer risk is needed. SUBJECTS/
methodsWe implemented a systematic review to examine the effects of varying levels of garlic intake on cancer. We conducted comprehensive literature searches in three electronic databases (MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science) for studies published between database inception and July or September of 2018. Two investigators independently screened abstracts and full-texts, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias (RoB). A total of one medium-quality randomized controlled trial (RCT) and 13 cohort studies graded as high RoB were included.
resultsThe 1-year follow-up results from a RCT showed that a significant decrease in the number and size of colorectal adenomas among participants with colorectal adenomas who received high-dose aged garlic extract (AGE) compared with those who received low-dose AGE (
conclusionsIn summary, the AGE was effective in reducing the number and magnitude of colorectal adenomas in one RCT, but there were inconsistent associations between garlic intake and colorectal cancer in cohort studies. Therefore, we could not draw a firm conclusion regarding the effects of garlic on cancer, because the current strength of evidence is inadequate due to a lack of number of high-quality RCTs.
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.