ReviewFrontiers in nutrition2023
Food groups and urologic cancers risk: a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective studies.
Review in Frontiers in nutrition, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Temporal trends, future projections, and burden of early-onset genitourinary cancers in Asia from 1990 to 2023: an analysis of the Global Burden of Disease Study 2023.Translational andrology and urology · 2026Article
- Dietary patterns, polygenic risk, and kidney cancer incidence: a UK Biobank cohort study.Journal of translational medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: To assess the association between 12 food groups intake and the risk of urologic cancers. Methods: We scanned PubMed and Web of Science databases up to April 1st, 2023, and 73 publications met the inclusion criteria in the meta-analysis. We used a random effects model to estimate the summary risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). Results: In the linear dose-response meta-analysis, an inverse association was found between each additional daily 100 g of fruits [RR: 0.89, 95%CI = (0.83, 0.97)], 100 g of vegetables [RR: 0.92, 95%CI = (0.85, 0.99)], 12 g of alcohol [RR: 0.91, 95%CI = (0.88, 0.94)] and 1 cup of coffee [RR: 0.95, 95%CI = (0.83, 0.97)] intake and the risk of renal cell carcinoma. Conversely, each additional daily 100 g of red meat intake was positively associated with renal cell carcinoma [RR: 1.41, 95%CI = (1.03, 2.10)]. Inverse associations were observed between each additional daily 50 g of egg [RR: 0.73, 95%CI = (0.62, 0.87)] and each additional daily 1 cup of tea consumption and bladder cancer risk [RR: 0.97, 95%CI = (0.94, 0.99)]. There were no significant associations for nonlinear dose-response relationships between 12 food groups and urological cancers. Conclusion: Our meta-analysis strengthens the evidence that appropriate intake of specific food groups, such as fruits, vegetables, alcohol, tea, and coffee, is associated with the risk of renal cell carcinoma or bladder cancer. More studies are required to fill the knowledge gap on the links between various food groups and urologic cancers because the evidence was less credible in this meta-analysis. Systematic Review Registration: This study was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42022340336).
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.