ReviewAdvances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.)2025
Lack of Genotoxic and Carcinogenic Potential for Nonsugar Sweeteners: A Review of Animal and Mechanistic Evidence.
Review in Advances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Comprehensive Review on Steviol Glycosides: Sources, Properties, Bioactivities, Sensory-Functional Enhancement and Bioproduction Strategies.Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Molecular Mechanisms of Aspartame-Induced Kidney Renal Papillary Cell Carcinoma Revealed by Network Toxicology and Molecular Docking Techniques.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
- Heterogeneous Biological Responses to Low-Level Sodium Saccharin Exposure: An Integrated Computational Toxicology and Mendelian Randomization Study.Dose-response : a publication of International Hormesis SocietyArticle
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
Globally, nonsugar sweeteners (NSSs) are commonly used in foods and beverages to enhance sweetness without added calories. NSSs have been the subject of numerous in vitro and animal studies to assess their potential carcinogenic risk to humans. As a complement to a larger systematic evaluation of the epidemiology evidence of NSSs and cancer, here we present a comprehensive review of the available experimental evidence from animal and mechanistic studies for the NSSs acesulfame-K (Ace-K), advantame, aspartame, cyclamate, neotame, saccharin, steviol glycosides, and sucralose within the context of ingredient safety. For this evaluation, we focused on genotoxicity, other potential cancer modes of action (MoAs), and carcinogenicity. Overall, high-quality studies have not shown evidence for carcinogenicity in animal models, except for saccharin, which causes bladder tumors in rats via a mechanism not relevant to humans. There is also no consistent or compelling evidence for any biologically plausible MoA by which any of these NSSs could cause cancer in humans. The results of this evaluation are consistent with the results of epidemiology studies, which have shown no consistent associations between NSS intake and cancer risk. Taken together, the body of available evidence supports previous conclusions by authoritative and regulatory bodies that Ace-K, advantame, aspartame, cyclamate, neotame, saccharin, steviol glycosides, and sucralose do not pose a genotoxic or carcinogenic risk to humans.
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.