SynthesisJournal of gastrointestinal cancer2025
Systematic Analysis of the Differential Effects of Red Meat on Colorectal Cancer Risks: A Meta-Analytic Approach.
Synthesis in Journal of gastrointestinal cancer, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesColorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common cancer worldwide, with rising incidence in younger populations. Red meat consumption has been proposed as a risk factor for CRC, though the evidence remains inconsistent. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to examine the associations between the consumption of beef, pork, and lamb with CRC, colon cancer (CC), and rectal cancer (RC) risk.
methodsThe findings from 27 studies published between 1993 and 2024 were included, involving over 1 million participants from diverse geographical regions. Relative risks were calculated using random-effects meta-analysis, with subgroup and meta-regression analyses performed to assess potential sources of heterogeneity.
resultsBeef consumption was significantly associated with increased CRC risk, with a 30% overall risk increase (95% CI: 1.10-1.54). The association with colon cancer (CC) was marginally significant (RR = 1.19, 95% CI: 0.99-1.43, p = 0.0585), while the link to rectal cancer (RC) was not statistically significant. Pork consumption was associated with a 17% increased CRC risk (95% CI: 1.09-1.25), with similar, nonsignificant trends for CC and RC. Lamb consumption was weakly associated with an 11% increase in CRC risk (95% CI: 1.02-1.21), though this was based on limited studies (n = 6), and no significant associations emerged for cancer subtypes. Study design and confounding factors influenced these associations, with case-control studies reporting stronger associations than cohort studies. Physical activity adjustments were pivotal, as studies without this adjustment consistently reported higher-risk estimates.
conclusionThese findings emphasise the importance of accounting several lifestyle factors in future research and public health guidance. While these results support current dietary guidelines recommending limited red meat consumption, they also underscore the complexity of diet-cancer relationships and the need for comprehensive, lifestyle-inclusive cancer prevention strategies.
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.